Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 28, 2025
The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
Simulated full weight bearing following posterior column acetabular fracture fixation: a biomechanical comparability
Till Berk1,2, Ivan Zderic3, Peter Schwarzenberg3
1AO Research Institute Davos, Clavadelerstrasse 8, 7270, Davos, Switzerland. Till.Berk@usz.ch.
Purpose:
The incidence of acetabular fractures (AFs) is increasing in all industrial nations, with posterior column fractures (PCFs) accounting for 18.5-22% of these cases. Treating displaced AFs in elderly patients is a known challenge. The optimal surgical strategy implementing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), total hip arthroplasty (THA), or percutaneous screw fixation (SF), remains debated. Additionally, with either of these treatment methods, the post-surgical weight bearing protocols are also ambiguous. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate construct stiffness and failure load following a PCF fixation with either standard plate osteosynthesis, SF, or using a screwable cup for THA under full weight bearing conditions.
Methods:
Twelve composite osteoporotic pelvises were used. A PCF according to the Letournel Classification was created in 24 hemi-pelvis constructs stratified into three groups (n = 8) as follows: (i) posterior column fracture with plate fixation (PCPF); (ii) posterior column fracture with SF (PCSF); (iii) posterior column fracture with screwable cup fixation (PCSC). All specimens were biomechanically tested under progressively increasing cyclic loading until failure, with monitoring of the interfragmentary movements via motion tracking.
Results:
Initial construct stiffness (N/mm) was 154.8 ± 68.3 for PCPF, 107.3 ± 41.0 for PCSF, and 133.3 ± 27.5 for PCSC, with no significant differences among the groups, p = 0.173. Cycles to failure and failure load were 7822 ± 2281 and 982.2 ± 428.1 N for PCPF, 3662 ± 1664 and 566.2 ± 366.4 N for PCSF, and 5989 ± 3440 and 798.9 ± 544.0 N for PCSC, being significantly higher for PCPF versus PCSF, p = 0.012.
Conclusion:
Standard ORIF of PCF with either plate osteosynthesis or using a screwable cup for THA demonstrated encouraging results for application of a post-surgical treatment concept with a full weight bearing approach. Further biomechanical cadaveric studies with larger sample size should be initiated for a better understanding of AF treatment with full weight bearing and its potential as a concept for PCF fixation.
