Comparison of the Strength and Holding Power of 4 Pin Designs for Use with Half Pin (Type I) External Skeletal Fixation

The strength and holding power of four pin designs for use with half pin (type I) external skeletal fixation were evaluated. Pins that were tested were fully threaded, nonthreaded, two cortices partially threaded, and one cortex partially threaded. The study involved three parts: (1) resistance of the pins to axial extraction immediately after insertion; (2) resistance of the pins to axial extraction 8 weeks after being inserted into the tibiae of live dogs; and (3) resistance of the pins to bending load. Pins with threads engaging two cortices were more resistant to axial extraction than nonthreaded pins in both the acute (p less than 0.0001) and chronic (p less than 0.0001) studies. Nonthreaded pins were more resistant to bending than fully threaded and two cortices partially threaded pins (p less than 0.0005). One cortex partially threaded pins possessed similar bending strength to nonthreaded pins (p = 0.21) and had 5.3 times more resistance to axial extraction in the acute study (p less than 0.0001) and 6.9 times more in the chronic study (p less than 0.0001). Though one cortex partially threaded pins were not as resistant to axial extraction as pins with threads engaging two cortices (p less than 0.0001), they were more resistant to bending loads (p less than 0.0005). Loss of holding power and pin failure are two of the most serious problems associated with fracture stabilization using external skeletal fixation. The results of this study suggest that one cortex partially threaded pins are better at maintaining holding power and resisting bending and breaking than nonthreaded pins.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Comparison of Holding Power of Three Different Pin Designs for External Skeletal Fixation in Avian Bone: A Study in Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo)

Objective— (1) To evaluate resistance to axial extraction of 3 pin designs in avian humerus and tibiotarsus; (2) to assess the effect of pin location within the bone on holding power; and (3) to assess the influence of thread pitch on holding power. Study Design— Resistance of pins to axial extraction was measured immediately after insertion. Animals— Adult common buzzards (Buteo buteo; n=9). Methods— Different pin designs (1 smooth; 2 threaded pins, differing in pitch) were inserted into the proximal and distal metaphysis and the proximal, middle, and distal diaphysis of the humerus and tibiotarsus. Maximum force required for axial extraction of pins was recorded. Results— Smooth pins had the lowest extraction force (P<.05). Pins inserted into the diaphysis (proximal, middle and distal) of the humerus and the distal metaphysis of the tibiotarsus had a greater pullout strength than pins in other locations. Pins with a smaller pitch inserted into the proximal diaphysis and distal metaphysis of the humerus, and the proximal metaphysis of the tibiotarsus had significantly greater holding power than pins with a larger pitch (P<.05). Conclusions— Pins inserted into the diaphysis of humerus and the distal metaphysis of the tibiotarsus are better at resisting extraction. Pins with a smaller pitch possess greater holding power than pins with a larger pitch in avian humerus and tibiotarsus. Clinical Relevance— Consideration should be given to pin location and thread pitch, when choosing external skeletal fixation to repair an avian humeral or tibiotarsal fracture.     

Holding power of three different pin designs in the femur and ulna of the common buzzard (Buteo buteo)

External skeletal fixation is generally considered the best stabilization technique for immobilizing avian long bone fractures, but one of its major complications is the failure of bone-fixation pin interface or the loss of holding power. Consequently, this study is aimed at elucidating which pin design offers more pull-out strength in certain bones of the common buzzard (Buteo buteo). To achieve this objective, three pin designs (a smooth design and two negative profile threaded designs, with different thread pitch) were placed in five positions along the femur and ulna of the common buzzard. The pin pull-out strength was measured with the purpose of comparing medullary and pneumatic bones, insertion sites, and pin designs. Threaded pins with negative profile showed greater holding power than smooth pins (P < 0.05). When comparing holding power between the ulna and femur, no differences were found for smooth pins, whereas threaded pins showed more pull-out strength in the ulna than in the femur (P < 0.05). There were no differences observed related to pin location along the same bone when considering the same pin type. These results suggest that negative profile threaded pins have more holding power than smooth pins and that pneumatic bones provide less pull-out strength to negative profile threaded pins than medullary bones.     

Effect of Fixation Pin Insertion on the Bone-Pin Interface

Smooth and partially threaded 3.12 mm (1/8 inch) trochar-tipped Steinmann pins were inserted transversely through both diaphyseal cortices of eight mature canine tibias using five methods. Angular velocity (revolutions per minute) during insertion and temperature elevation due to friction during penetration of the second cortex were recorded. The force required for extraction of the pins from the bone and the histologic appearance of the bone-pin interface were determined for one-half of the pins 2 days after insertion and for one-half of the pins 56 days after insertion. The increase in temperature was similar for all methods of insertion except high speed power, which was significantly greater (p < 0.05). The force required for axial pin extraction was similar for pins inserted by hand chuck, predrilled, and low speed power methods after both 2 and 56 days. Pins inserted by high speed power and hand drill required force similar to the others for extraction after 2 days but significantly less force (p < 0.05) for extraction after 56 days. The partially threaded pins required significantly greater force (p < 0.01) extraction after both 2 and 56 days. Histologic examination revealed increased mechanical bone damage surrounding hand chuck inserted pins, increased bone necrosis surrounding high speed power inserted pins, and increased inflammatory changes surrounding hand drill inserted pins.     

Determination of Safe Depth of Pin Penetration for Repair of Distal Femoral Physeal Fractures in Immature Dogs: A Comparison of Normograde and Retrograde Pin Placement

Objective —The purpose of this study was to determine the depth that implants may be safely placed into the distal femoral epiphysis (DFE) for the repair of distal femoral physeal fractures.
Study Design —The depth of the DFE was related to the radiographic thickness of the patella in this experimental study.
Animals or Sample Population —Twenty immature canine cadavers.
Methods —Patella thicknesses were measured from lateral radiographs. Actual DFE depths were determined for pins driven in normograde fashion and for pins driven retrograde from the central depression between the metaphyseal pegs and from the cranial pegs. The association of DFE depth and patella thickness was evaluated using linear regression analysis. Using 95% confidence intervals, rules for estimating the safe depth of implant placement into the DFE were determined.
Results —DFE depth had significant correlation with patella thickness for pins placed in retrograde fashion from the central depression between the metaphyseal pegs (r²= .83) and from the cranial pegs (r²= .82) and for pins placed in normograde fashion (r²= .65).
Conclusions —Based on 95% confidence intervals, pins placed in retrograde fashion from the central depression between the metaphyseal pegs may be safely driven into the DFE a distance equal to 140% of patella thickness. Pins placed from the cranial metaphyseal pegs may be driven to a depth equal to 80% of patella thickness, and pins placed in normograde fashion may be driven to a depth equal to 30% of patella thickness.
Clinical Relevance —Measurement of patella thickness assists the surgeon in determining the approximate depth that pins may be driven into the DFE without penetrating the articular surface of the stifle joint.     

A Comparison of Acute Pull-Out Strength Between Two-Way and One-Way Transfixation Pin Insertion for External Skeletal Fixation in Canine Bone

This study tested the hypothesis that two-way insertion of an external skeletal fixator trans-fixation pin would weaken the pin-bone interface. Smooth and partially threaded (end) trans-fixation pins were placed in tibiae of 32 cadavers by slow speed drilling or hand placement through a predrilled pilot hole. In one bone of each tibial pair, pins were inserted 2 cm beyond the distal cortex and retracted to a predetermined position (two-way). In the contralateral limb, the pins were inserted in one forward motion to the predetermined position (one-way). The peak force (Newtons) required to extract the pins (pull-out strength) axially at a rate of 1 mm/sec was determined by using a universal testing machine. A significant (p < .05) decrease in pull-out strength was found in pins placed by two-way insertion (674 +/- 410) as opposed to one-way insertion (766 +/- 432). The results of this in vitro study suggest that one-way insertion should be used clinically to decrease weakening of the pin-bone interface and prevent possible failure of external fixators. A significantly greater pull-out strength was found for threaded pins placed in the proximal diaphysis (1459 +/- 330 Newtons) compared to the distal metaphysis (873 +/- 297 Newtons).     

Biomechanical Comparison of the Trocar Tip Point and the Hollow Ground Tip Point for Smooth External Skeletal Fixation Pins

Objective —To compare the insertional characteristics of external fixator pins with hollow ground (HG), modified HG, and trocar (T) points.
Study Design —An acute, in vitro biomechanical evaluation.
Sample Population—Thirteen radii from canine cadavers.
Methods —A total of 16 T-tipped and 16 HG-tipped pins were inserted into 8 canine radii. Ten pins of each modification of the HG tip (length of the cutting edge reduced by 0.127 mm and 0.254 mm, respectively) were inserted into another five radii. All pins were inserted with low-speed power drilling and 80 N drilling load. Differences between peak tip temperature, drilling energy, and pullout force were determined for each pin type at both diaphyseal and metaphyseal locations.
Results —HG-tipped pins showed a 40% lower tip temperature in diaphyseal bone, a 25% reduction in drilling energy in diaphyseal bone, and a reduction of pullout force in both diaphyseal (65%) and metaphyseal (50%) bone compared with T-tipped pins. HG 0.254-mm pins generated higher tip temperatures and had greater pullout than HG pins in diaphyseal bone.
Conclusions —The HG tip was a more efficient design; however, the reduction in pullout force suggests that, because a better hole was drilled, radial preload is reduced. Reduction of the cutting edge by 0.254 mm increased the pullout force but also increased the temperatures.
Clinical Relevance —Thermal and microstructural damage are reduced by the HG tip, but pin-bone interface stability is also compromised. The use of a tip with 0.254 mm reduction in the cutting edge may optimize the biological and mechanical factors at the pin-bone interface.     

In vitro comparison of the use of two large-animal, centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pin designs in the equine third metacarpal bone

OBJECTIVE: To compare the in vitro holding power and associated microstructural damage of 2 large-animal centrally threaded positive-profile transfixation pins in the diaphysis of the equine third metacarpal bone. SAMPLE POPULATION: 25 pairs of adult equine cadaver metacarpal bones. PROCEDURE: Centrally threaded positive-profile transfixation pins of 2 different designs (ie, self-drilling, self-tapping [SDST] vs nonself-drilling, nonself-tapping [NDNT] transfixation pins) were inserted into the middiaphysis of adult equine metacarpal bones. Temperature of the hardware was measured during each step of insertion with a surface thermocouple. Bone and cortical width, transfixation pin placement, and cortical damage were assessed radiographically. Resistance to axial extraction before and after cyclic loading was measured using a material testing system. Microstructural damage caused by transfixation pin insertion was evaluated by scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The temperature following pin insertion was significantly higher for SDST transfixation pins. Periosteal surface cortical fractures were found in 50% of the bones with SDST transfixation pins and in none with NDNT transfixation pins. The NDNT transfixation pins were significantly more resistant to axial extraction than SDST transfixation pins. Grossly and microscopically, NDNT transfixation pins created less damage to the bone and a more consistent thread pattern. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In vitro analysis revealed that insertion of NDNT transfixation pins cause less macroscopic and microscopic damage to the bone than SDST transfixation pins. The NDNT transfixation pins have a greater pull out strength, reflecting better initial bone transfixation pin stability.     

Use of a four pin and methylmethacrylate fixation in L7 and the iliac body to stabilize lumbosacral fracture-luxations: a clinical and anatomic study

Objectives— To describe the clinical outcome of a 4 pin lumbosacral fixation technique for lumbosacral fracture–luxations, and to refine placement technique for iliac pins based on canine cadaver studies.
Study Design— Retrospective and anatomic study.
Sample Population— Dogs (n=5) with lumbosacral fracture-luxations and 8 cadaveric canine pelvi.
Methods— Lumbosacral fracture–luxations were stabilized with a 4 pin (positive-profile threaded) and bone cement fixation. Caudal pins were inserted in the iliac body and cranial pins were inserted into the L7 or L6 pedicle and body. Follow-up examinations and radiographs were performed to assess patient outcome. Intramedullary pins were inserted into the iliac bodies of 8 cadaver pelvi. Radiographs were taken to measure pin insertion angles and define ideal insertion angles that would maximize pin purchase in the ilium.
Results— Follow-up neurologic examination was normal in 4 dogs. Radiographic healing of the fracture was evident in 5 dogs. One implant failure occurred but did not require re-operation. For cadaver iliac pins, mean craniocaudal insertion angle was 29° and mean lateromedial insertion angle was 20°.
Conclusions— Four pin and bone cement fixation effectively stabilizes lumbosacral fracture luxations. The iliac body provides ample bone stock, which can be maximized using an average craniocaudal pin trajectory of 29° and an average lateromedial pin trajectory of 20°.
Clinical Relevance— Lumbosacral fracture–luxations can be stabilized with 4 pin and bone cement fixation in the lumbar vertebrae and iliac body, using 29 and 20° as guidelines for the craniocaudal and lateromedial pin insertion angles in the ilium.     

An In Vitro Comparison of Hollow Ground and Trocar Points on Threaded Positive-Profile External Skeletal Fixation Pins in Canine Cadaveric Bone

OBJECTIVE: To compare the microstructural damage created in bone by pins with lathe-cut and rolled-on threads, and to determine the peak tip temperature and damage created by positive-profile external fixator pins with either hollow ground (HG) or trocar (T) tips during insertion. STUDY DESIGN: An acute, in vitro biomechanical evaluation. SAMPLE POPULATION: Twenty-seven canine tibiae. METHODS: Lathe-cut thread design with T point (LT-T), rolled-on thread design with T point (RT-T), and rolled-on thread design with HG point (RT-HG) pins were evaluated. Twenty pins of each type were inserted under constant drilling pressure into 12 canine tibiae (12 diaphyseal and 8 metaphyseal sites per pin type). Peak pin tip temperature, drilling energy, end-insertional pin torque, and pullout force were measured for each pin. For the histologic study, five pins of each type were inserted into cortical and cancellous sites in 15 additional tibiae. Entry and exit damage, and thread quality were assessed from 100 micron histologic sections by using computer-interfaced videomicroscopy. RESULTS: T-tipped pins reached higher tip temperature in both diaphyseal and metaphyseal bone compared with HG-tipped pins. RT-T pins had higher pullout strength (diaphyseal) and end-insertional torque compared with other combinations. No differences in drilling energy or insertional bone damage was found between the three pin types (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: T-tipped pins mechanically outperformed HG-tipped pins. Pin tip and thread design did not significantly influence the degree of insertional bone damage. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: T-tipped pins may provide the best compromise between thermal damage and interface friction for maximizing performance of threaded external fixator pins.     

A Comparison of the Synthes 4.5-mm Cannulated Screw and the Synthes 4.5-mm Standard Cortex Screw Systems in Equine Bone

Objective —To determine risk of failure of the Synthes 4.5-mm cannulated screw system instrumentation in equine bone and to compare its application with the Synthes 4.5-mm standard cortex screw system.
Study Design —The maximum insertion torque of the cannulated and standard cortex screw systems were compared with the ultimate torsional strengths of the equipment. Pullout strength and ultimate tensile load of cannulated and standard cortex screws were also determined.
Sample Population—Paired equine cadaver third metacarpal and third carpal bones.
Methods —Maximum insertion torque and ultimate torsional strengths were determined by using an axial-torsional, servohydraulic materials testing system and a hand-held torquometer. Pullout tests were performed by using a servohydraulic materials testing system.
Results —Maximum insertion torque of all cannulated instrumentation was less than ultimate torsional strength at all locations ( P < .05). Maximum insertion torques of cannulated taps and screws were greater than for standard taps and screws in the third carpal bone ( P < .002). Pullout strength of the cannulated screws was less than the standard cortex screws at all sites ( P < .001). Cannulated screws broke before bone failure in all but one bone specimen. Conclusions—The risk of cannulated instrument or screw failure during insertion into bone is theoretically low. The relatively low pullout strength of the cannulated screws implies that the interfragmentary compression achievable is likely to be less than with standard cortex screws. Clinical Relevance—The relatively low pullout strength of the cannulated screw suggests that its risk of failure during fracture repair is greater than with the standard cortex screw.     

In vitro comparison of metaphyseal and diaphyseal placement of centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins in the equine third metacarpal bone

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate in vitro holding power and associated microstructural and thermal damage from placement of positive-profile transfixation pins in the diaphysis and metaphysis of the equine third metacarpal bone. SAMPLE POPULATION: Third metacarpal bones from 30 pairs of adult equine cadavers. PROCEDURE: Centrally threaded positive-profile transfixation pins were placed in the diaphysis of 1 metacarpal bone and the metaphysis of the opposite metacarpal bone of 15 pairs of bones. Tensile force at failure for axial extraction was measured with a materials testing system. An additional 15 pairs of metacarpal bones were tested similarly following cyclic loading. Microstructural damage was evaluated via scanning electron microscopy in another 6 pairs of metacarpal bones, 2 pairs in each of the following 3 groups: metacarpal bones with tapped holes and without transfixation pin placement, metacarpal bones following transfixation pin placement, and metacarpal bones following transfixation pin placement and cyclic loading. Temperature of the hardware was measured with a surface thermocouple in 12 additional metacarpal bones warmed to 38 C. RESULTS: The diaphysis provided significantly greater resistance to axial extraction than the metaphysis. There were no significant temperature differences between diaphyseal and metaphyseal placement. Microstructural damage was limited to occasional microfractures seen only in cortical bone of diaphyseal and metaphyseal locations. Microfractures originated during drilling and tapping but did not worsen following transfixation pin placement or cyclic loading. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins have greater resistance to axial extraction in the diaphysis than in the metaphysis of equine third metacarpal bone in vitro. This information may be used to create more stable external skeletal fixation in horses with fractures.     

A Novel Pin Distraction Device for Arthroscopic Assessment of the Medial Meniscus in Dogs

Objective— To describe an extra-articular joint distractor for meniscal examination and treatment during canine stifle arthroscopy.
Study Design— Case series.
Animals— Dogs ≥20 kg with suspected cranial cruciate ligament (CrCL) deficiency.
Methods— A custom designed linear side bar was constructed to allow invasive pin distraction of the stifle joint. Its design efficacy for distraction of the medial joint compartment, observation and probing of the medial meniscus, and value during meniscal surgery was evaluated by clinical use.
Results— Application of the stifle distractor medial to the stifle joint using 2 negative threaded pins was easily performed percutaneously without the need of power equipment; however, unintended intra-articular placement of 1 threaded pin occurred in 2 stifles, without appreciable consequence to joint function. Observation as well as thorough probing of the caudal horn of the medial meniscus, even in the presence of a prominent remnant of the CrCL or severe periarticular fibrosis, was possible. Partial meniscectomy was effectively performed as needed without apparent damage to the associated articular surfaces.
Conclusions— Distraction and translation of the medial compartment of the stifle joint using invasive pin distraction allowed observation and palpation of the caudal horn of the medial meniscus so that assessment and treatment were readily accomplished without apparent morbidity.
Clinical Relevance— With careful attention to accurate pin placement, invasive pin distraction of the medial compartment of the canine stifle joint may improve arthroscopic evaluation and treatment of meniscal pathology.     

Epoxy Putty for Free-Form External Skeletal Fixators

Objective —To evaluate the suitability of epoxy putty for use as a connecting beam material in a free-form external skeletal fixator.
Design —Mechanical evaluation of beams and the pin-material interface of commonly used methacrylates and the proposed epoxy putty.
Procedure —The apparent modulus, bending strength, and toughness of 10 beams of three methacrylates (Technovit, APEF System, Bone Cement) and three epoxy putties (Oatey Epoxy Putty, All-Metals PowerPoxy, and Plumber's PowerPoxy) were determined in three-point bending. The shear strength of smooth and roughened-shaft pins embedded in the three methacrylates and the Oatey Epoxy Putty was determined by pull-out testing.
Results —The epoxy putties had similar strength, greater apparent modulus, and reduced toughness when compared with the methacrylates. The shear strength of the smooth pin interface with the Oatey Epoxy putty was greater than that with the methacrylates. The interface with roughened pins was much stronger than that with smooth pins for all materials tested.
Clinical Relevance —Epoxy putty is a suitable material for free-form external fixators. It is easy to handle, inexpensive, and has suitable setting times and mechanical properties.     

Ellis Pin Complications in Seven Dogs

Complications developed with the clinical use of Ellis pins in external skeletal fixation in seven dogs weighing 11 to 24 kg. Pins broke at the threaded-nonthreaded shaft junction in six dogs, and there was radiographic evidence of pin loosening six dogs. One pin pulled out causing loss of fixation in one dog. These complications with the recently introduced Ellis pin emphasize a need for further evaluation of its proper use.     

Biomechanical Evaluation of a Toggle Pin Technique for Management of Coxofemoral Luxation

Toggle pin stabilization is an accepted technique for the management of coxofemoral (CF) luxation in dogs. The purpose of this study was to determine, in vitro, the respective contributions of several aspects of toggle pin repair to the overall stability of fixation. Factors evaluated were the manner and frequency with which toggle pins oriented on insertion, effect of orientation on toggle pin strength, effect of suture type on ligament prosthesis strength and load sustained by the fixation, and comparison of repair using a modified toggle design to that of capsulorrhaphy. When placed in cadavers using standard technique, conventional toggle pins were found to orient significantly more frequently in one of two possible positions. Mechanical testing of fixations performed in experimentally luxated cadaver hips demonstrated a high (12/20) incidence of toggle pin failure using the conventional implant in the most common orientation. When tested alone, toggle pins were weakest mechanically in this orientation. Rotating the implant 180° increased mean load to failure by 249%. There was no significant difference in load sustained by conventional toggle fixations using No. 2 braided polyester versus 50 lb test monofilament nylon as the suture ligament prosthesis. However, the higher stiffness of the polyester suture may be more favorable for use in this application. Fixation using a toggle rod designed to allow evaluation of construct stability when failure of the toggle is eliminated resulted in an increase in maximum load sustained before luxation (47% of the intact control hips). This load was not significantly different than the resistance to luxation afforded by capsulorrhaphy. This study suggests that when implanting conventional toggle pins, consideration should be given to ensuring placement in the strongest orientation.     

Effects of Three Intramedullary Pinning Techniques on Proximal Pin Location and Articular Damage in the Canine Tibia

The effects of three different techniques of intramedullary (IM) pin placement on pin location and incidence of stifle joint injury were evaluated using 70 cadaver canine tibiae after middisphyseal osteotomy. In 50 tibiae, pins were placed retrograde in either a nondirected (group A) or a craniomedially directed fashion (group B) with 25 tibiae in each group. Pins were driven normograde (group N) in 20 tibiae. All the stifles were dissected to qualitatively evaluate pin interference with different joint structures. End-on radiographs of the tibial plateaus were used to quantitatively evaluate pin location. Interference with the caudal cruciate ligament, medial meniscus, lateral meniscus, or meniscal ligaments was not observed in any group. There was a significant association between pinning technique and incidence of involvement of the cranial cruciate ligament ( P < .005), patella ( P < .001), patellar ligament ( P < .005), and femoral condyle ( P < .01). Pin location for group A was significantly different from either other group in a cranial-caudal direction ( P = .003), and was significantly different from group N in a medial-lateral direction ( P = .005). No significant difference was observed between pin location for groups B and N in either plane. It was concluded that although nondirected retrograde pinning cannot be recommended, retrograde pins directed craniomedially may be an acceptable technique for the repair of proximal to mid-diaphyseal tibial fractures if care is taken to properly seat the pins.     

An In Vitro Comparison of the Holding Strength of Partially Threaded vs Nonthreaded Intramedullary Pins

The pin holding strengths of partially threaded and nonthreaded intramedullary pins were compared in an in vitro study. The mean percent holding strength of partially threaded pins to nonthreaded pins was 102%. No relationships could be determined when the holding strength of the pins was evaluated as a function of the dog's weight, bone length, and length of pin within the bone. It was concluded that no statistical difference in in vitro pin holding strength exists between the two types of pins.     

Ex Vivo Biomechanical Comparison of Pin Fixation Techniques for Canine Distal Femoral Physeal Fractures

Objective— To compare the biomechanical properties of five intramedullary (IM) pin fixation techniques for Salter-Harris type I fractures of the distal femur in dogs.
Study Design— Randomized, one-way factorial design composed of five treatment groups: (1) single IM pin, (2) dynamic IM crossed pins, (3) paired convergent pins, (4) crossed pins, and (5) crossed polyglycolic acid (PGA) rods.
Sample Population— Forty pairs of cadaver canine femurs.
Materials— One femur of each pair was manually fractured and subsequently repaired; the contralateral intact femur served as its control. Each femur was loaded in torsion until failure occurred and load-deformation curves were generated.
Results— The crossed-pin technique sustained the greatest load to failure (116.8%) followed by the paired convergent pins (104.8%), dynamic IM pins (90.6%), single IM pin (72.1%), and crossed PGA rods (71.9%). Statistically significant differences in strength at failure were detected between the crossed-pin and single IM pin and the crossed-pin and crossed PGA rod techniques. All fixation techniques underwent greater deformation (1.5 times as much) and had a lower stiffness (66% to 75%) compared with the intact controls; however, there was no significant difference between techniques. Failure in the paired convergent and crossed-pin techniques occurred by fracture of the bone; failure in the other techniques occurred by distraction at the fracture site.
Conclusion— The rotational stability of any of the fixation techniques appears to be primarily determined by the ability to prevent distraction and maintain interdigitation of the physis.
Clinical Relevance— When choosing a particular fixation technique for repair of a distal femoral physeal fracture, consideration should be given to the technique's relative biomechanical merits.     

Evaluation of compression generated by self compressing Orthofix bone pins and lag screws in simulated lateral humeral condylar fractures.

A simulated lateral humeral condylar fracture was created in each of the 52 humeri collected from 26 dogs. One humerus from each pair was stabilized with a 2.0 mm cortical bone screw which was inserted in lag fashion. The other humerus from each pair was stabilized with a 2.2 mm threaded diameter Orthofix pin inserted across the condyle. Prior to each repair, an antirotational K-wire was placed and then the Pressurex Sensitive film was inserted in the osteotomy site in order to determine the compressive pressure (MPa), compressive force (KN), and area of compression (cm(2)) achieved during fixation. The maximum insertional torque achieved before stripping was measured for each implant. The mean compression generated by insertion of a 2.0 mm lag screw was 20.36 +/- 1.51 MPa compared to 18.88 +/- 1.76 MPa generated by a 2.2 mm Orthofix pin (p < 0.003). The mean area of compression generated by insertion of a 2.0 mm lag screw was 2.39 +/- 1.29 cm(2), compared to 1.16 +/- 0.84 cm(2) generated by insertion of a 2.2 mm Orthofix pin (p < 0.0001). The mean compressive force (compression x area compressed) generated by insertion of a 2.0 mm lag screw was 4.96 +/- 2.90 Kn, compared to 2.20 +/- 1.65 Kn generated by insertion of a 2.2 mm Orthofix pin (p < 0.0001). The mean insertion torque to failure for the lag screws was 0.49 +/- 0.07 NM, compared to 0.91 NM +/- 0.18 NM generated by the Orthofix pins (P < 0.0001). Both repair methods are likely to be acceptable for the repair of similar fractures in small breed dogs.