analysis of syndesmotic screws - portfolio of natalie s....

12
ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws Introduction to Biomaterials Phillip Amsler and Natalie Ferrari 5/10/2011

Upload: others

Post on 26-Feb-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

ROCHESTER INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws

Introduction to Biomaterials

Phillip Amsler and Natalie Ferrari

5/10/2011

Page 2: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

Introduction The general overview of this project is to determine why syndesmotic screws will break in a

patient and whether the screws should be removed. The syndesmosis screw is commonly used in the

repair of a pronation-external rotation injury to the ankle. This hardware is efficient in aiding the

stability of the tibiofibular joint to allow the ligaments surrounding the ankle to heal properly. However,

with the addition of the screw into the ankle joint, a separate surgery is needed to remove the

mechanism, weight bearing activities are postponed, and other complications can result

postoperatively. Currently, it has been brought to attention that syndesmotic screws are being

overused and could perhaps be avoided if the situation permits. According to the papers, the same

screws are implanted for syndesmotic fixation regardless of patient lifestyle, gender, or weight.

However, it is apparent that under normal operating conditions for an active person, the screws will

likely break between the fibula and tibia. To test this, we will be using bone on bone substitute and

applying force in the shear direction on unbroken syndesmotic screws. From this, we will be able to

determine the shear stress needed to break the screw and how high a person would have to potentially

jump to break them.

Background Information Based on the paper by Anna N. Miller, MD “Functional Outcomes after Syndesmotic Screw

Fixation and Removal” it is apparent that screw removal is highly beneficial to the patient3. Three

months after screw removal (referred to hardware removal), the average patient saw an increase in

flexibility, as well as a decrease in pain. These findings support the idea that the screws were limiting

the range of motion for the patient and that with physical activity, the screws will likely be broken.

However, the study does neglect weights of the patient as a factor which is something that our study

will focus on because it has been identified as a major issue leading to screw breakage and implant

failure.

Another item that this paper identifies as a factor contributing to implant failure is the length of

time the screws are left in vivo. This is not necessarily a major factor contributing to fatigue or

corrosion, but impacts the healing of the patient. As the patient becomes more active they are more

likely to engage in athletics, running, or other forms of activity that will increase the impact loading on

the screws. However, the paper claims that the longest times the screws are left in are just over 5

months and that there are not significant differences between the 3 month and 5 month patients. This

Page 3: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

analysis seems flawed by the previous argument because it assumes that the patient will not be active in

the time leading up to the follow up surgery.

Overall the article is in favor of removing the syndesmotic screws from the ankle to increase the

range of motion. The proposed experiment would also investigate whether the hardware should be

removed based on failure mechanics. The variables to be investigated will include those which are most

notably neglected in this case study including patient weight and physical activity level.

Next, in the “Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Fixation: A Cadaveric, Simulated Fracture

Stabilization Study Comparing Bioabsorbable and Metallic Single Screw Fixation” by Stephen Cox, MD,

the comparison of different materials is introduced into the problem. The study proposes the idea that

since stainless steel screws are usually removed; bio-absorbable materials such as co-polymers that will

break down and be replaced by bone tissue over time could be used as a replacement. The material

they used in the study was 82:18 poly-L-lactic acid/poly-glycolic acid (a copolymer alloy) and its

mechanical properties were compared to those of typical stainless steel screws. The study was

conducted in a cadaver’s ankle after the hardware was inserted into the bone and focused on the

fatigue failure of the screws. The test load ranged from 90 to 900 N at 1.5Hz for 1000 cycles and the co

polymer did not significantly differ from its stainless steel counterpart. The axial stiffness of the

copolymer was about 100 N/mm less than the steel at the beginning and end of the loading, but scored

higher in the angle of failure at about 50 degrees of ankle movement. It did require more torque for the

steel screw to break in the ankle however, which is an import consideration for this project.

Again the first critique of this study would have to be the time line they are using for testing. Is

it really that important that the screws don’t fail in fatigue? According to most doctors and research,

the screws don’t stay in for longer than 3 or 4 months and if they do, they are expected to break which

returns the patient to a normal range of motion anyway3. The biggest reason a screw would fail is likely

coming from athletic activity (which they shouldn’t be doing) or just being heavier than the average

person. The project will not use any cadaver ankles, however the bone substitute should be viable

enough to give an idea of how much shear stress the screws can endure. This article gives a good idea

of how to test the screws and how much force they can endure in vivo.

Overall this paper is also in favor of removing the screw (that’s the assumption they have to

make in order to compare the degradable co-polymer) and also gives the general fatigue test results for

stainless steel screws. For instance the screws tested are found to have infinite life in the ankle (1

Page 4: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

million cycles), but are known to fracture for most inactive adults in around 10 years2. The paper does

not investigate how the screws might perform in patients with increased activity level. This test, while

important, also neglects the impact loading. We feel that this is a large oversight, and would like to

investigate further into how impact loading affects the screws.

The third study investigated was “Mechanical Considerations for the Syndesmosis Screw” by

Boden, S.D, Labropoulos, P.A. The intent of the paper was to bring to light the mechanical need for the

syndesmosis screw and its ability to provide stability to the internal fixation of the fibula and medial

malleolus during the event of a pronation-external rotation fracture. A sample group of thirty

embalmed and five fresh cadaver legs were mounted to a wooden frame with 15-20 degrees of internal

rotation. The load test was performed on two groups. Group I consisted of thirteen specimens that were

subject to serially sectioning the deltoid, syndesmosis, and interosseous membrane in 1.5-centimeter

increments. Group II consisted of the other seventeen specimens that were subjected to the same

sectioning of ligaments expect the deltoid was left alone until the last step. This allowed for final

comparison between the groups. Each specimen was dissected to expose the deltoid ligament, the

anteromedial section of the joint capsule, the syndesmosis, and the distal fifteen centimeters of the

interosseous membrane. A plate was also bolted to the bottom of the foot to allow a rope and pulley

system to provide specific loading to the ankle. The pulley system was set up at the distal lateral corner

of the foot plate in order to properly pronate the foot for testing. Performing the test in this fashion

allowed directly observing and measuring the widening of the syndesmosis in response to different

loads. It also provided qualitative analysis as to whether osteotomy and rigid fixation had any affect on

the ankle when exposed to this same loading.

The resulting data from the loading model developed provided insight pertaining to how certain

situations of fractures and tearing react under uniform loads. Widening of the syndesmosis was found to

be analogous between bone that was intact and bone that was treated via osteotomy and fixation. The

baseline syndesmosis width for Group I was determined to be around 3.2 ± 0.2 millimeters for observer

number one and 3.1 ± 0.2 millimeters for observer number 2. Group II experienced very minimal

widening of 1.4 ± 0.3 millimeters when the medial malleolus and fibula were intact but experienced

similar widening to Group I after the last step when the deltoid was severed.

From this study, it was observed that while the deltoid was still intact, the syndesmosis

experienced minimal widening even though the syndesmosis and interosseous membrane were

disturbed. As a result, stability of the syndesmosis could be reinstated by rigid fixation of the fibula and

Page 5: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

tibia, therefore avoiding trans-syndesmotic fixation. In the event that the deltoid is severed, the width of

the syndesmosis experienced an increase and was also directly proportional to any disruption to the

interosseous membrane. From this evidence, the avoidance of consistently inserting a syndesmotic

screw to provide and improve stability was demonstrated. In the event of a fibular fracture, the

necessity for a syndesmotic screw was found to be related to the height of the facture. A critical zone for

this height was 3-4.5 centimeters. Fractures occurring proximal to this zone would still need to be

supported by trans-syndesmotic stabilization, but those occurring distal to this range would not be

necessary.

This study exemplified a more in depth look at why and how fails occur. It provided more insight

on what ligaments are affected and what ligaments to not play a large role in stabilization. Also, this

study used a very interesting model to perform the testing with the jig and loading system. It offered a

good suggestion for why the screws should or shouldn’t be removed and took into consideration other

factors the previous studies did not.

The last article considered was “Operative aspects of the syndesmotic screw: Review of current

concepts” by Van Den Bekerom, M.P.J. This was a great review paper revealing the current models and

practices used in order to repair ankle injuries with the syndesmotic screws. This publication also stands

for a collection of technical characteristics of performing surgery using this mechanism and to provide

suggestions and insight for clinical practice. Although the article discusses many issues regarding the

screws, the important points that can be taken from the article related to our project are the size of the

screws, use of bioabsorbable screws, time until weight bearing, and whether the screws should be

removed before weight bearing.

According to Van Den Bekerom M.P.J., it was observed that a larger diameter screw allowed for

more resistance to a shear stress affecting the distal syndesmosis. The load was that applied was equal

to that of weight bearing. Although a larger diameter provides more resistance, a further look into the

affects of the holes left by the larger screws shows that this is not fully advantageous to the patient. The

use of bioabsorbable screws was a focus for other studies with the intent of eliminating a second

surgery and delaying recovery. There was no observable difference in the measurements performed

when comparing the metal to the bioabsorbable screws. In addition to this information, patients who

were treated with this biomaterial experienced less swelling and were able to return to regular activities

more quickly. However, biomaterials described in the paper, come with a greater price than a

manufactured screw. The largest controversy and one that our project will ideally shed light on, is when

Page 6: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

weight bearing should be deferred until and if the screw should be removed. Weight bearing is usually

not recommended before about six weeks after surgery. Some surgeons feel that leaving the screw in

place while introducing weight bearing exercises results in no adverse effects where as others feel

weight bearing causes the screws to fracture or loosen, causing discomfort in the joint. One study

preferred that the hardware should be removed before participating in any weight bearing exercises

because leaving it in would result in irregular ankle movements causing pain and discomfort. In addition,

the screws could potentially fracture and loosen causing the joint to be unstable.

This article provided a lot of great information with regards to what we would like to observe in

our own study but it did caution readers about extrapolating data. The studies used cadavers in order to

retrieve their data which does not replace a living, human leg. Changes in bone composition and

ligament degeneration are factors that are hard to replicate and draw conclusions from. For our

purposes, this provides great insight into what surgeons prefer and why.

Page 7: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

Methods

In order to analyze the failure mechanics of the syndesmotic screws, a pair of syndesmotic

fixation screws were obtained from the research lab of Mark L. Prasarn, MD at the University of

Rochester. (We are very

grateful for this donation

since these screws would

have cost more than $100

per screw otherwise) To

analyze the syndesmotic

screws, a pair of cancellous

bone blocks were obtained

so that they could

represent the tibia and

fibula. They were

arranged in a fashion

similar to figure 1. The 2

inch screw is the typical

length used for ankle

fixation, and the .153

inches was an

approximation of the

distance between the tibia and fibula2.

In order to keep the spacing between the

bone specimens constant, a pair of Allan Wrenches

were oiled and placed between the two bone

specimens. The oil was used so that there is a

minimum frictional effect between the two screws

(see assumptions: all loads are supported by screw in

shear), and the Allan wrenches are used to make sure

that there was no bending moment in the screw from

uneven spacing (see above assumption).

With this basic rig constructed, it was attached to a

table using a C-clamp to keep the rig static under

loading. A ruler was taped next to the rig, and a

tripod was used to record deflections in the screw.

Finally a mass hangar was used to load and unload

the weights from test rig. The general purpose of this rig was to replicate the shear forces experienced

between the fibula and tibia bones when applying weight on one’s foot.

Figure 2: The test rig being set up

Figure 1: The overall schematic of the test rig used.

Page 8: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

In order to create a realistic model for this experiment we needed to make several assumptions.

First and foremost was the friction between the bone segments needed to be neglected. This allows us

to assume that all loading is applied in shear to the screw which will ultimately break the screw. In

addition, we must assume that there is no bending moment in the screw. This is likely not 100% true,

but the spacing between the two was controlled by using Allan wrenches, so this is an assumption we

can make.

For analyzing the data, we used 2

4

D

F

for shear stress where F was the weight of the hangar

(lbs), and D was the diameter of the screw (in). Also D

was used to analyze the strain in the screw

where δ was the deflection (in), and D was the diameter of the screw (in).

Figure 3: An example of the deflection and ultimate failure from loading.

Page 9: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

Results The results of this experiment came in two trials. First, the experiment was conducted in the

mechanics of materials lab with a total weight of 57.4 pounds. We were hopeful that this weight would

be enough to cause a failure, however this only put the screw under elastic deformation, which is

evident from the stress strain curve. Below are the results for the elastic region of a syndesmotic screw.

Trial 1 (elastic region) Weight (lbs) Disp (mm) Disp (in) Shear Stress (psi) Strain (in/in)

0.0 0 0.000 0 0.000

5.4 0.5 0.020 720 0.201

10.4 1 0.039 1383 0.402

15.4 1.5 0.059 2046 0.603

20.4 2 0.079 2709 0.803

25.4 2.4 0.094 3372 0.964

30.4 2.9 0.114 4035 1.165

35.4 3.2 0.126 4697 1.286

40.4 3.3 0.130 5360 1.326

45.4 3.6 0.142 6023 1.446

50.4 4 0.157 6686 1.607

55.4 4.2 0.165 7349 1.687

57.4 4.4 0.173 7614 1.768

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

She

ar S

tre

ss (

psi

)

Shear Strain (in/in)

Shear Stress

Table 1: A compilation of the stresses and strains from the elastic region trial.

Figure 3: The stress-strain curve generated from the elastic region trial (see table 1)

Page 10: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

In the second trial we used weights from the student life center in order to increase the total

weight. It should be noted that gym weights have a high uncertainty in their values (~15%) so there will

be a higher amount of error in these stress calculations.

Trial 2 (Plastic Failure)

Weight (lbs) Disp (mm) Disp (in) Shear Stress (psi) Strain (in/in)

0.0 0 0 0 0.000

45.4 4.5 0.177 6023 1.808

65.4 4.8 0.189 8675 1.928

85.4 5 0.197 11326 2.009 Table 2: The results from the first plastic deformation study and fracture.

Trial 3 (Plastic Failure)

Weight (lbs) Disp (mm) Disp (in) Shear Stress (psi) Strain (in/in)

0.0 0 0 0 0.000

25.4 1.4 0.055 3372 0.562

50.4 2.8 0.110 6686 1.125

75.4 4.2 0.165 10000 1.687

80.4 4.7 0.185 10663 1.888

85.4 4.7 0.185 11326 1.888 Table 3: The results from the second plastic deformation study and fracture.

The results of the plastic

deformation experiments were not

what we were expecting. From the x-

rays we were expecting there to be

some sort of brittle failure in under

shear stress, however the screws used

in this experiment merely bent causing

the cancellous bone specimens to fracture before the screws did. According to this model, it is more

likely for the ankle bone to break before the screws do, which is not only not desirable, it is also

unrealistic. The screws can clearly break in a patient without there being any adverse effects on the

patient’s ankle.

Figure 4: The final failure mode of both sydesmotic screws.

Page 11: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

Discussion From the test rig, it was concluded that the screws will fail under normal loading. Although the

failure mode was different from in vivo studies because the screws plastically deformed and did not

completely fracture, they did not withstand the stressed applied to them. During the experiment, it was

hypothesized that the amount of weight provided in an on campus lab would be sufficient. Soon after

beginning testing, it was realized more would be needed. Some limitations of this test would be to

change how the weights were loaded to the rig. For this test, weight loading was very tedious and noisy.

Also, because the weight hanger was removed each time weight was added it was assumed that the

screw could be experiencing elastic deformation each time it was loaded and unloaded. This would

result in weakening the screw after each iteration. It was also decided that impact testing would be a

better approach to replicate what occurs when the screws break in vivo. Lastly, the limited amount of

screws available for the study restricted the amount of times the test could be performed.

Recommendations for future work of this kind would be to find a more accurate and efficient way to

load the weight and to have a larger sample size.

After performing this test, it was established that the screws definitely need to be removed after

properly healing has taken place. Agreeing with the current studies out there, if using the current

material the screws is not safe to leave in vivo once the bone has healed. The screws will undoubtedly

loosen and or break after the patient begins applying pressure to the ankle. As for changing the current

material, this test did not investigate the performance of bioabsorbable screws. However, it would be a

major cause for concern as to whether the screws would be able to stabilize a weight bearing joint while

absorbing into the body. The current material performs as it should and until a material can outperform

the syndesmotic screws, it is believed that they will prevail.

Conclusions Overall, the results from the experiment were very exciting yet surprising. It was interesting to

observe that the screws could only support about 85 lbs before beginning to fracture. From this, the

screws would most definitely need to be removed once the bone has healed properly. The patient

would have to abstain from weight bearing exercises and schedule a second surgery. Also, with the

current material only causing an inconvenience and not a problem with it’s function, a biodegradable

screw is not a necessity. More testing would need to be performed in order to conclude whether a

biodegradable screw can withstand the forces applied in such a circumstance.

Page 12: Analysis of Syndesmotic Screws - Portfolio of Natalie S. Ferrarinatalieferrari.weebly.com/uploads/6/1/3/9/6139829/... · 2018-09-06 · Introduction The general overview of this project

References

1. Boden, S.D, Labropoulos, P.A., McCorwin, P., Lestini, W.F., Hurwitz, S.R. (1989). “Mechanical

consideration for the syndesmosis screw. A cadaver study.” J Bone Joint Surg Am, 71,

1548-1555.

2. “Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Fixation: A Cadaveric, Simulated Fracture Stabilization Study

Comparing Bioabsorbable and Metallic Single Screw Fixation” Stephen Cox, MD, Debi P.

Mukherjee, ScD, Alan L. Ogden, BS, Raymond H. Mayuex, BS, Kalia K. Sadasivan, MD,

James A. Albright, MD, and William S. Pietrzak, PhD

3. “Functional Outcomes After Syndesmotic Screw Fixation and Removal”, Anna N. Miller, MD,

*Omesh Paul, MD, *Sreevathsa Boraiah, MD,† Robert J. Parker, BS, *David L. Helfet,

MD,*and Dean G. Lorich, MD*

4. Van Den Bekerom, M.P.J., Hogervorst, M., Bolhuis, H.W., Niek van Dijk, C. (2008). “Operative

aspects of the syndesmotic screw: Review of current concepts.” Int. J. Care

Injured,39,491-498.