IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/gcmbxx/v19y2016i12p1266-1277.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biomechanical assessment and clinical analysis of different intramedullary nailing systems for oblique fractures

Author

Listed:
  • J. A. Alierta
  • M. A. Pérez
  • B. Seral
  • J. M. García-Aznar

Abstract

The aim of this study is to evaluate the fracture union or non-union for a specific patient that presented oblique fractures in tibia and fibula, using a mechanistic-based bone healing model. Normally, this kind of fractures can be treated through an intramedullary nail using two possible configurations that depends on the mechanical stabilisation: static and dynamic. Both cases are simulated under different fracture geometries in order to understand the effect of the mechanical stabilisation on the fracture healing outcome. The results of both simulations are in good agreement with previous clinical experience. From the results, it is demonstrated that the dynamization of the fracture improves healing in comparison with a static or rigid fixation of the fracture. This work shows the versatility and potential of a mechanistic-based bone healing model to predict the final outcome (union, non-union, delayed union) of realistic 3D fractures where even more than one bone is involved.

Suggested Citation

  • J. A. Alierta & M. A. Pérez & B. Seral & J. M. García-Aznar, 2016. "Biomechanical assessment and clinical analysis of different intramedullary nailing systems for oblique fractures," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(12), pages 1266-1277, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:19:y:2016:i:12:p:1266-1277
    DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2015.1125473
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2015.1125473
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10255842.2015.1125473?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:19:y:2016:i:12:p:1266-1277. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/gcmb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.