| Objectives To compare the stability of acetabular posterior wall fractures fixed withlocking reconstruction plate, reconstruction plate and simple lag screw, and explore morereasonable way in clinical treatment of posterior wall acetabular fracture fixation andprovide biomechanical basis.Methods Eighteen adult fresh semipelvis are made into models of the posterior wall ofacetabular fractures according to Olson experimental methods, and then divided into A,B, C three groups randomly. These models are fixed with two lag screws (Group A),reconstruction plate (Group B), locking reconstruction plate (Group C). Simulate thehuman hip flexion90°abduction and adduction rotation neutral position and by axialloading experiments, we measure the longitudinal displacements, the internal fixationfailed loading and axisal stiffness to compare the strength of the three methods of internalfixation.Results Under the same loading, group B and C’s longitudinal displacements are lessthan group A, group B and C’s internal fixation failed loading and axisal stiffness aremore than group A (P <0.05); There is, however, no difference between the Group B andGroup C in the longitudinal displacements, internal fixation failed loading and axisstiffness(P>0.05).Conclusions For the acetabular posterior wall fractures, locking reconstruction plateand reconstruction plate internal fixation methods can provide greater stability thansimple lag screws. There is similar stability between locking reconstruction plate andreconstruction plate internal fixation methods. They can be used for internal fixationmanagement of the posterior wall acetabular fractures. |
