Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Axial and torsional stability of supracondylar femur osteotomies: biomechanical comparison of the stability of five different plate and osteotomy configurations

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Little is known regarding the biomechanical stability and stiffness of implants and techniques used in supracondylar femur osteotomies (SCO). Therefore, fixation stability and stiffness of implants to bone was investigated under simulated physiological loading conditions using a composite femur model and a 3D motion-analysis system.

Methods

Five osteotomy configurations were investigated: (1) oblique medial closing-wedge fixated with an angle-stable implant; (2) oblique and (3) perpendicular medial closing-wedge, both fixated with an angled blade plate; and lateral opening-wedge fixated with (4) a spacer plate and (5) an angle-stable lateral implant. The motion measured at the osteotomy was used to calculate the stiffness and stability of the constructs.

Results

The least amount of motion and highest stiffness was measured in the medial oblique closing-wedge osteotomy fixated with the angled blade plate. The lateral opening-wedge techniques were less stable and had a lower stiffness compared with the medial; the oblique saw cuts were more stable and had a higher stiffness than the perpendicular.

Conclusion

This experimental study presents baseline data on the differences in the primary stability of bone–implant constructs used in SCO. The data in this study can be used as reference for future testing of SCO techniques. Furthermore, it is recommended that based on the differences found, the early postoperative rehabilitation protocol is tailored to the stability and stiffness of the fixation method used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Agneskirchner JD, Freiling D, Hurschler C, Lobenhoffer P (2006) Primary stability of four different implants for opening wedge high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 14:291–300

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Brinkman JM, Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD, Staubli AE, Wymenga AB, van Heerwaarden RJ (2008) Osteotomies around the knee: patient selection, stability of fixation and bone healing in high tibial osteotomies. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:1548–1557

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cusick RP, Lucas GL, McQueen DA, Graber CD (2000) Construct stiffness of different fixation methods for supracondylar femoral fractures above total knee prostheses. Am J Orthop 29:695–699

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dvir Z, Prushansky T (2000) Reproducibility and instrument validity of a new ultrasonography-based system for measuring cervical spine kinematics. Clin Biomech 15:658–664

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Firoozbakhsh K, Behzadi K, DeCoster TA, Moneim MS, Naraghi FF (1995) Mechanics of retrograde nail versus plate fixation for supracondylar femur fractures. J Orthop Trauma 9:152–157

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Franco V, Cipolla M, Gerullo G, Gianni E, Puddu G (2004) Open wedge osteotomy of the distal femur in the valgus knee. Orthopade 33:185–192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Frigg R (2003) Development of the locking compression plate. Injury 34(Supplement 2):6–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. van Heerwaarden RJ, Wymenga AB, Freiling D, Lobenhoffer P (2007) Distal medial closed wedge varus femur osteotomy stabilized with Tomofix plate fixator. Op Tech Orthopaedics 17:12–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Heiner AD, Brown TD (2001) Structural properties of a new design of composite replicate femurs and tibias. J Biomech 34:773–781

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hsu RW, Himeno S, Coventry MB, Chao EY (1990) Normal axial alignment of the lower extremity and load-bearing distribution at the knee. Clin Orthop 90:215–227

    Google Scholar 

  11. Learmonth ID (1990) A simple technique for varus supracondylar osteotomy in genu valgum. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:235–237

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Luo CF (2004) Reference axes for reconstruction of the knee. Knee 11:251–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Marti RK, Schröder J, Witteveen A (2000) The closed wedge varus supracondylar osteotomy. Oper Tech Sports Med 8:48–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. McDermott AG, Finklestein JA, Farine I, Boynton EL, MacIntosh DL, Gross A (1988) Distal femoral varus osteotomy for valgus deformity of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:110–116

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Miniaci A, Grossmann SP, Jakob RP (1990) Supracondylar femoral varus osteotomy in the treatment of valgus knee deformity. Am J Knee Surg 3:65–73

    Google Scholar 

  16. Miniaci A, Watson LW (2002) Distal femoral osteotomy. In: Fu FF (ed) Knee surgery, 1994. Williams & Wilkins, New York, pp 1173–1180

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stahelin T, Hardegger F, Ward JC (2000) Supracondylar osteotomy of the femur with use of compression Osteosynthesis with a malleable implant. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:712–722

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stahelin T, Hardegger F (2004) Incomplete, supracondylar femur osteotomy. A minimally invasive compression osteosynthesis with soft implant. Orthopade 33:178–184

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Staubli AE, De Simoni C, Babst R, Lobenhoffer P (2003) TomoFix: a new LCP-concept for open wedge osteotomy of the medial proximal tibia—early results in 92 cases. Injury 34(Suppl 2):55–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stoffel K, Dieter U, Stachowiak G, Gachter A, Kuster MS (2003) Biomechanical testing of the LCP—how can stability in locked internal fixators be controlled? Injury 34(Suppl 2):11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Stoffel K, Stachowiak G, Kuster M (2004) Open wedge high tibial osteotomy: biomechanical investigation of the modified Arthrex Osteotomy Plate (Puddu Plate) and the TomoFix Plate. Clin Biomech 19:944–950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Szivek JA, Weng M, Karpman R (1990) Variability in the torsional and bending reponse of a commercially available composite “femur”. J Appl Biomater 1:183–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wagner M (2003) General principles for the clinical use of the LCP. Injury 34(Suppl 2):31–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Walsh JC, Quinlan JF, Stapleton R, FitzPatrick DP, McCormack D (2007) Three-dimensional motion analysis of the lumbar spine during “free squat” weight lift training. Am J Sports Med 35:927–932

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zlowodzki M, Williamson S, Cole PA, Zardiackas LD, Kregor PJ (2004) Biomechanical evaluation of the less invasive stabilization system, angled blade plate, and retrograde intramedullary nail for the internal fixation of distal femur fractures. J Orthop Trauma 8:494–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The respective manufacturers provided all plates and screws; they had no influence on the study itself in any way, shape or form, however. No additional funding was received for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Limb Deformity Reconstruction Unit, Sint Maartenskliniek, P.O. Box 8000, 3440 JD, Woerden, The Netherlands

    J.-M. Brinkman & R. J. van Heerwaarden

  2. Laboratory for Biomechanics und Biomaterials, Orthopaedic Department, Hannover Medical School, Anna-von-Borries-Strasse 1-7, 30625, Hannover, Germany

    C. Hurschler

  3. Department of Trauma and Reconstructive Surgery, Henriettenstiftung, Marienstrasse 72-90, 30171, Hannover, Germany

    J. D. Agneskirchner & D. Freiling

Authors
  1. J.-M. Brinkman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C. Hurschler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. D. Agneskirchner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. Freiling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. J. van Heerwaarden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J.-M. Brinkman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brinkman, JM., Hurschler, C., Agneskirchner, J.D. et al. Axial and torsional stability of supracondylar femur osteotomies: biomechanical comparison of the stability of five different plate and osteotomy configurations. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19, 579–587 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-010-1281-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-010-1281-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation