Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?

INTRODUCTION: Closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation either by crossed pinning construct (CPC) or lateral divergent pinning construct (LDPC) are the recommended treatment for displaced (Gartland type 2 & 3) supracondylar humerus fractures (SCHF) in children. Many studies have compared t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: S., Aizat, Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim, Awang, Shukrimi, AS, AS, Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil
Format: Conference or Workshop Item
Language:English
Published: 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/7/79351%20abstract.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.iium.irep.79351
record_format dspace
spelling my.iium.irep.793512020-04-14T03:18:20Z http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/ Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters? S., Aizat Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim Awang, Shukrimi AS, AS Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil R Medicine (General) RD701 Orthopedics INTRODUCTION: Closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation either by crossed pinning construct (CPC) or lateral divergent pinning construct (LDPC) are the recommended treatment for displaced (Gartland type 2 & 3) supracondylar humerus fractures (SCHF) in children. Many studies have compared the biomechanical stability between these two. A biomechanical analysis of varying crossing point location in CPC has not been performed previously. The main objective of this study is to compare the stability of various crossing point location in crossed K- wiring construct in treatment of SCHF in children. The other objective is to compare the stability between CPC and LDPC in the treatment of SCHF in children. METHODS: Thirty synthetic humeri were osteotomized simulating the SCHF. Specimens were all anatomically reduced and pinned using two 1.6 mm Kirschner wires (K-wires) in five different constructs namely centre point CPC, medial point CPC, lateral point CPC, superior point CPC and LDPC. Six samples were prepared for each construct and were tested for linear forces (extension, flexion, valgus, varus) and rotational forces (internal rotation and external rotation). Data for fragment stiffness (N/mm or Nmm/degree) were analysed and a level of P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The centre point CPC was the stiffest for both linear and rotational force but Lateral point CPC, and Superior point CPC showed no statistically significant stability difference when compared to the stiffest construct (centre point CPC). Lateral divergence construct showed no statistically significance rotatory instability, but showed significant linear instability when compared to centre point CPC.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The Centre point CPC was proved to be the stiffest construct. However, the stability of lateral point CPC and superior point CPC were comparable and showed no statistically significant difference when compare to Centre point CPC. If crossed pinning construct was chosen as method of treatment, the treating surgeons do not necessarily have to revise the crossed wire fixation in order to get perfect centre crossing point fixation. This will eventually reduce the numbers of attempt during K- wire insertion and reduce the possible complications associated with multiple attempt procedures. 2019 Conference or Workshop Item NonPeerReviewed application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/7/79351%20abstract.pdf S., Aizat and Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim and Awang, Shukrimi and AS, AS and Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil (2019) Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters? In: 49th Malaysia Orthopaedic Association Annual Scientific Meeting/ Annual General Meeting, 2nd-4th May 2019, Kuala Lumpur. (Unpublished)
institution Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia
building IIUM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider International Islamic University Malaysia
content_source IIUM Repository (IREP)
url_provider http://irep.iium.edu.my/
language English
topic R Medicine (General)
RD701 Orthopedics
spellingShingle R Medicine (General)
RD701 Orthopedics
S., Aizat
Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim
Awang, Shukrimi
AS, AS
Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil
Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
description INTRODUCTION: Closed reduction and percutaneous pin fixation either by crossed pinning construct (CPC) or lateral divergent pinning construct (LDPC) are the recommended treatment for displaced (Gartland type 2 & 3) supracondylar humerus fractures (SCHF) in children. Many studies have compared the biomechanical stability between these two. A biomechanical analysis of varying crossing point location in CPC has not been performed previously. The main objective of this study is to compare the stability of various crossing point location in crossed K- wiring construct in treatment of SCHF in children. The other objective is to compare the stability between CPC and LDPC in the treatment of SCHF in children. METHODS: Thirty synthetic humeri were osteotomized simulating the SCHF. Specimens were all anatomically reduced and pinned using two 1.6 mm Kirschner wires (K-wires) in five different constructs namely centre point CPC, medial point CPC, lateral point CPC, superior point CPC and LDPC. Six samples were prepared for each construct and were tested for linear forces (extension, flexion, valgus, varus) and rotational forces (internal rotation and external rotation). Data for fragment stiffness (N/mm or Nmm/degree) were analysed and a level of P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The centre point CPC was the stiffest for both linear and rotational force but Lateral point CPC, and Superior point CPC showed no statistically significant stability difference when compared to the stiffest construct (centre point CPC). Lateral divergence construct showed no statistically significance rotatory instability, but showed significant linear instability when compared to centre point CPC.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The Centre point CPC was proved to be the stiffest construct. However, the stability of lateral point CPC and superior point CPC were comparable and showed no statistically significant difference when compare to Centre point CPC. If crossed pinning construct was chosen as method of treatment, the treating surgeons do not necessarily have to revise the crossed wire fixation in order to get perfect centre crossing point fixation. This will eventually reduce the numbers of attempt during K- wire insertion and reduce the possible complications associated with multiple attempt procedures.
format Conference or Workshop Item
author S., Aizat
Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim
Awang, Shukrimi
AS, AS
Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil
author_facet S., Aizat
Abdul Razak, Ardilla Hanim
Awang, Shukrimi
AS, AS
Zainal Abidin, Muhammad 'Adil
author_sort S., Aizat
title Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
title_short Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
title_full Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
title_fullStr Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
title_full_unstemmed Biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
title_sort biomechanical analysis of crossed pinning construct in supracondylar fracture of humerus in children: does point of crossing matters?
publishDate 2019
url http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/7/79351%20abstract.pdf
http://irep.iium.edu.my/79351/
_version_ 1665894798010089472
score 13.211869