三种内固定器械固定中足损伤的生物力学比较

doi:10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2019.02.013

中国临床解剖学杂志 ›› 2019, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (2): 179-184.doi: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2019.02.013

三种内固定器械固定中足损伤的生物力学比较

李亮^1,2，　徐永清²，　何晓清²，　李川²

1.昆明医科大学研究生部，昆明 650500； 2.联勤保障部队第九二0医院，昆明 650032

收稿日期:2017-10-24 出版日期:2019-03-25 发布日期:2019-04-29
通讯作者: 徐永清，教授，博士生导师，E-mail:xuyongqingkm@163.net
作者简介:云南省院士工作站（2015IC030）；云南省科技计划项目（2015BC004）
基金资助:
云南省院士工作站（2015IC030）；云南省科技计划项目（2015BC004）

Biomechanical analysis in using three different implants for midfoot injury

LI Liang ^1,2， XU Yong-qing ²， HE Xiao-qing²， LI Chuan ²

1. Graduate faculty of Kunming Medical University, Kunming 650500,China; 2.Department of Orthopedic Surgery Kunming General Hospital Chengdu Military Command Kunming 650032,China

Received:2017-10-24 Online:2019-03-25 Published:2019-04-29

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的　评价新型镍钛记忆合金三角固定器在治疗中足损伤中的固定稳定性，通过比较3 种内固定在中足外侧柱移位性损伤中对前足足底压力分布的影响并对其生物力学进行分析，为选择内固定提供实验参考。方法　取6只成人下肢尸体冷冻标本。制成第4、5跗跖关节骨折脱位模型，对4、5跗跖关节进行记忆合金三角固定器固定，H型接骨板固定，2.0 mm克氏针固定，克氏针分别从4、5跖骨打入骰骨。经加载600 N 后，通过Tekscan压力传感器，测量前足足底压力的变化，应用ElectroForce®3510高精度生物材料试验系统机进行轴向压缩力学测试，分别计算刚度值，并进行统计学分析。结果　第4、5跗跖关节分别用三角固定器、钢板、克氏针固定后，第4、5跖骨头下的峰值压力则较骨折脱位状态有所增大，第2、3跖骨头下的峰值压力较骨折脱位状态下都有所减小，差异有统计学意义（P<0.05）。三角固定器组第4、5跖骨头下压力峰值与正常组相近。钢板固定组、记忆合金三角固定器、克氏针固定组组对外侧柱脱位固定后与正常组相比足部总体压缩刚度值无显著差异（P>0.05），疲劳试验后克氏针固定组静态压缩刚度较疲劳试验前明显减少，差异有统计学意义。结论　记忆合金三角固定器治疗跗跖关节外侧柱损伤其恢复足底压力的能力及生物力学稳定性良好，为镍钛记忆合金三角固定器内固定器的临床应用提供生物力学依据。

关键词: 三角固定器, 　中足损伤, 　足底压力, 　生物力学

Abstract:

Objective　To evaluate the stability of new Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner fixator in treatment of midfoot injury and measure the changes of plantar pressure of the lateral column dislocation by three different implants to provide experimental reference in selecting implants and evaluate the biomechanical properties of those implants．Methods　Six fresh foot specimens were made into the models of the lateral column dislocation，which were fixed with Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner fixator，the bridge plate and 2mm K-wire in turn. After the loading of 600 N，the changes of the plantar pressure in forefoot were measured by the method of the Tekscan Evolution handle pressure system．During the experiment, axial compression was performed with ElectroForce®3510 series test instruments. The compression stiffness of each bone-fixation combination was calculated and statistically analyzed. Results While the tarsometatarsal joint fracture dislocation was fixated by those there different kind of implants, the pressure under the fourth and fifth tarsometatarsal joints would all increased; the peak pressure under the second and third metatarsal head would all decrease, and differences were statistically significant（P＜0.05）．Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner showed the statistical significant difference compared with the normal state（P>0.05）. There was no statistically significance between the compression stiffness of the three implants before fatigue test. The compression stiffness of K-wire group was decreased with significance. Conclusion Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner fixator would help plantar pressure of the forefoot return to the normal state. The stability of the Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner fixator is favored to meet the special biomechanical needs, which lays the foundation for its clinical use.

Key words: Nickel titanium memory alloy three-corner fixator, 　Midfoot injury；　Biomechanical；Plantar pressure

李亮,徐永清,何晓清,李川. 三种内固定器械固定中足损伤的生物力学比较[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2019, 37(2): 179-184.

LI Liang,XU Yong-qing,HE Xiao-qing,LI Chuan . Biomechanical analysis in using three different implants for midfoot injury[J]. Chinese Journal Of Clinical Anatomy, 2019, 37(2): 179-184.

参考文献 17

[1]	Rosenbaum A, Dellenbaugh S, Dipreta J, et al. Subtle injuries to the lisfranc joint[J]. Orthopedics, 2011, 34(11):882-887.
[2]	Buzzard BM, Briggs PJ. Surgical management of acute tarsometatarsal fracture dislocation in the adult[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res,1998(353):125-133.
[3]	Hatem SF. Imaging of lisfranc injury and midfoot sprain[J]. Radiol Clin North Am, 2008, 46(6):1045-1060.
[4]	李春光，俞光荣，李兵，等. 内侧楔骨与第2跖骨底间韧带的解剖研究及临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2012, 30(02):119-122.
[5]	Panchbhavi VK, Molina DT, Villarreal J, et al. Three-dimensional, digital, and gross anatomy of the Lisfranc ligament[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 2013, 34(6):876-880.
[6]	刘凯，李义凯，邵红岩，等. 跗跖关节韧带的解剖观测及其意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2012, 30(2):123-126.
[7]	Chiodo CP, Myerson M S. Developments and advances in the diagnosis and treatment of injuries to the tarsometatarsal joint[J]. Orthop Clin North Am, 2001, 32(1):11-20.
[8]	Murphy N, Olney D. Lisfranc joint injuries: trauma mechanisms and associated injuries[J]. J Trauma,1994, 36(3):464-465.
[9]	Schepers T, Oprel PP, Van Lieshout EM. Influence of approach and implant on reduction accuracy and stability in lisfranc fracture-dislocation at the tarsometatarsal joint[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 2013, 34(5):705-710.
[10]	Cressman MR, Pawl RP. Serpentine myelographic defect caused by a redundant nerve root. Case report[J]. J Neurosurg,1968, 28(4):391-393.
[11]	Marks RM, Parks BG, Schon LC. Midfoot fusion technique for neuroarthropathic feet: biomechanical analysis and rationale[J]. Foot Ankle Int,1998,19(8):507-510.
[12]	Stavlas P, Roberts CS, Xypnitos FN, et al. The role of reduction and internal fixation of Lisfranc fracture-dislocations: a systematic review of the literature[J]. Int Orthop, 2010,34(8):1083-1091.
[13]	Castro M, Melao L, Canella C, et al. Lisfranc joint ligamentous complex: MRI with anatomic correlation in cadavers[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2010,195(6):W447-W455.
[14]	Macmahon A, Kim P, Levine D S, et al. Return to sports and physical activities after primary partial arthrodesis for lLisfranc injuries in young patients[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 2016, 37(4):355-362.
[15]	Ly TV, Coetzee JC. Treatment of primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries: primary arthrodesis compared with open reduction and internal fixation. A prospective, randomized study[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2006, 88(3):514-520.
[16]	van Koperen PJ, de Jong VM, Luitse JS, et al. Functional outcomes after temporary bridging with locking plates in Lisfranc injuries[J]. J Foot Ankle Surg, 2016, 55(5):922-926.
[17]	李川，徐永清，颜翼，等. 镍钛记忆合金腕骨三角融合器有限元分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2012, 30(6):678-682.

三种内固定器械固定中足损伤的生物力学比较

Biomechanical analysis in using three different implants for midfoot injury

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 17

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	李笑予, 张磊, 付磊, 李东波, 汪国友. 三步接骨法治疗Sanders Ⅱ型跟骨骨折的有限元研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 65-70.
[2]	吴研飞, 马剑雄, 卢斌, 王颖, 柏豪豪, 靳洪震, 马信龙. CT后处理技术重建CT值与终板抗压强度的相关性研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 71-76.
[3]	张悦, 蔡兴博, 张必欢, 王斌, 徐永清. 全腕关节置换术后腕关节生物力学研究进展[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 112-114.
[4]	欧阳北平, 马向阳, 罗春山, 邹小宝, 梁栋柱, 陆廷盛, 陈啟鸰. 钉尾横连与棒-棒横连在后路寰枢椎固定中的生物力学对比研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2023, 41(5): 588-592.
[5]	林文杰, 孙欣, 黄文华, 魏波, 林涛, 梁振明, 钟环, 张欣, 欧阳汉斌. 踝关节融合术后后足关节生物力学分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2023, 41(2): 212-217.
[6]	童杰, 季伟, 黄志平, 周若舟, 房佐忠, 朱青安. 枕颈区后路柔性动态固定的生物力学研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2022, 40(3): 315-319.
[7]	仝铃, 许阳阳, 王一丹, 马渊, 王海燕, 李筱贺. 颈椎前路微型记忆加压合金板的有限元分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2022, 40(3): 320-326.
[8]	余盛, 庞清江. 颈椎间孔韧带的解剖特点及其临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2022, 40(1): 109-112.
[9]	童杰, 季伟, 黄志平, 周若舟, 房佐忠, 朱青安. 寰枢椎后路柔性固定的生物力学研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2022, 40(1): 72-77.
[10]	王高飞, 张珠峰, 魏壮. V-Y延长指背腱膜终腱止点重建术治疗陈旧性锤状指的生物力学实验研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2021, 39(3): 330-335.
[11]	杨诚, 李祯, 廖坚文, 樊仕才, 杨健, 白晓春. 基于柠檬酸合成的新型可降解螺钉生物相容性和生物力学特性的研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2021, 39(2): 182-186.
[12]	胡力达, 田广永, 徐飘, 林琼萍. 鼓膜-听骨链精细三维重建及谐响应有限元分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2019, 37(6): 680-685.
[13]	康永强, 　芮永军 . 2~5掌指关节屈伸活动中关节面应力分布的有限元分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2019, 37(3): 299-303.
[14]	凌钦杰,林晖,谢普生,邓羽平,黄文华. 全腰椎非线性有限元模型的建立与有效性验证[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2018, 36(6): 662-667.
[15]	蔡慧,徐世明,邓子文,黄东,刘晓春,余超群. 锚钉联合骨道技术重建肘关节尺侧副韧带前束的生物力学研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2018, 36(3): 319-324.