Nail diameter significantly impacts stability in combined plate-nail constructs used for fixation of supracondylar distal femur fractures

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

Abstract Objectives: Plate-nail (PN) combinations have been described for fixation of supracondylar distal femur fractures. Small diameter retrograde intramedullary nails (rIMN) are commonly used. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of nail diameter on construct stability. We hypothesized that a larger diameter rIMN would not significantly change the stiffness of the PN construct when tested in torsional or axial loading. Methods: Twelve synthetic osteoporotic femurs were used to compare nail diameters in an extraarticular supracondylar distal femur fracture model (Orthopaedic Trauma Association/Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen type 33-A3). Constructs were fixed with a 12-hole 4.5 mm pre-contoured lateral distal femoral locking plate combined with either a 9 mm (n = 6) or an 11 mm (n = 6) retrograde intramedullary nail (rIMN). Specimens were cyclically loaded in torsion and axial compression. The primary outcome was construct stiffness, calculated using the average slope of the force-displacement curves. Results: The 11 mm PN construct was approximately 1.6 times stiffer than the 9 mm PN construct averaged across all torsional loads (2.39 +/− 0.41 Nm/deg vs 1.44 +/− 0.17 Nm/deg) and approximately 1.3 times stiffer than the 9 mm PN construct averaged across all axial loads (506.84 +/− 44.50 N/mm vs 376.77 +/− 37.65 N/mm). There were no construct failures. Conclusions: In this biomechanical model, nail diameter had a significant effect on both torsional and axial stiffness in PN constructs. While the use of smaller diameter rIMNs has been proposed to allow for easier placement of implants, the effect on overall construct stiffness should be considered in the context of the patient, their fracture and desired postoperative weight bearing recommendations. Level of Evidence: N/A