Background: The design of an external fixator with the optimal biomechanical function and the lowest profile has been highly pursued, as fracture healing is dependent on the stability and durability of fixation, and a low profile is more desired by patients. The plate-type external fixator, a novel prototype of an external tibial fixation device, is a low profile construct. However, its biomechanical properties remain unclear. The objective of this study was to investigate the stiffness and strength of the plate-type external fixator and the unilateral external fixator. We hypothesized that the plate-type external fixator could provide higher stiffness while retaining sufficient strength. Methods: Fifty-four cadaver tibias underwent a standardized midshaft osteotomy to create a fracture gap model to simulate a comminuted diaphyseal fracture. All specimens were randomly divided into three groups of eighteen specimens each and stabilized with either a unilateral external fixator or two configurations of the plate-type external fixator. Six specimens of each configuration were tested to determine fixation stiffness in axial compression, four-point bending, and torsion, respectively. Afterwards, dynamic loading until failure was performed in each loading mode to determine the construct strength and failure mode. Results: The plate-type external fixator provided higher stiffness and strength than the traditional unilateral external fixator. The highest biomechanics were observed for the classical plate-type external fixator, closely followed by the extended plate-type external fixator. Conclusions: The plate-type external fixator is stiffer and stronger than the traditional unilateral external fixator under axial compression, four-point bending and torsion loading conditions.

Background The design of an external fixator with the optimal biomechanical function and the lowest profile has been highly pursued, as fracture healing is dependent on the stability and durability of fixation, and a low profile is more desired by patients. The plate-type external fixator, a novel prototype of an external tibial fixation device, is a low profile construct. However, its biomechanical properties remain unclear. The objective of this study was to investigate the stiffness and strength of the plate-type external fixator and the unilateral external fixator. We hypothesized that the plate-type external fixator could provide higher stiffness while retaining sufficient strength. Methods Fifty-four cadaver tibias underwent a standardized midshaft osteotomy to create a fracture gap model to simulate a comminuted diaphyseal fracture. All specimens were randomly divided into three groups of eighteen specimens each and stabilized with either a unilateral external fixator or two configurations of the plate-type external fixator. Six specimens of each configuration were tested to determine fixation stiffness in axial compression, four-point bending, and torsion, respectively. Afterwards, dynamic loading until failure was performed in each loading mode to determine the construct strength and failure mode. Results The plate-type external fixator provided higher stiffness and strength than the traditional unilateral external fixator. The highest biomechanics were observed for the classical plate-type external fixator, closely followed by the extended plate-type external fixator. Conclusions The plate-type external fixator is stiffer and stronger than the traditional unilateral external fixator under axial compression, four-point bending and torsion loading conditions.

Background People have been pursuing to design an external fixator with the optimal biomechanics function and the lowest profile, since the fracture healing is dependent on the stability and durability of fixation and a low profile is more acceptable to patients. The plate-type external fixator, a novel prototype of an external tibial fixation device, is a low profile construct. However, the biomechanical properties remained unclear. The objective of the study was to investigate stiffness and strength of the plate-type external fixator and the unilateral external fixator. We hypothesized that the plate-type external fixator could provide higher stiffness, while retaining sufficient strength. Methods Fifty-four cadaver tibias underwent a standardized midshaft osteotomy to create a fracture gap model to simulate a comminuted diaphyseal fracture. All specimens were randomly divided into three groups of eighteen specimens each and stabilized with either the unilateral external fixator or the two configurations of the plate-type external fixator. Six specimens of each configuration were tested to determine fixation stiffness in axial compression, four-point bending, and torsion, respectively. Afterwards, dynamically loading until failure was performed in each load mode to determine construct strength and failure modes. Results The plate-type external fixator provided higher stiffness and strength compared with the traditional unilateral external fixator. The highest biomechanics was observed for the classical plate-type external fixator, with the extended plate-type external fixator close behind. Conclusions The plate-type external fixator is stiffer and stronger than the traditional unilateral external fixator under axial compression, four-point bending and torsion loading conditions.

Background The design of an external fixator with the optimal biomechanical function and the lowest profile has been highly pursued, as fracture healing is dependent on the stability and durability of fixation, and a low profile is more desired by patients. The plate-type external fixator, a novel prototype of an external tibial fixation device, is a low profile construct. However, its biomechanical properties remain unclear. The objective of this study was to investigate the stiffness and strength of the plate-type external fixator and the unilateral external fixator. We hypothesized that the plate-type external fixator could provide higher stiffness while retaining sufficient strength. Methods Fifty-four cadaver tibias underwent a standardized midshaft osteotomy to create a fracture gap model to simulate a comminuted diaphyseal fracture. All specimens were randomly divided into three groups of eighteen specimens each and stabilized with either a unilateral external fixator or two configurations of the plate-type external fixator. Six specimens of each configuration were tested to determine fixation stiffness in axial compression, four-point bending, and torsion, respectively. Afterwards, dynamic loading until failure was performed in each loading mode to determine the construct strength and failure mode. Results The plate-type external fixator provided higher stiffness and strength than the traditional unilateral external fixator. The highest biomechanics were observed for the classical plate-type external fixator, closely followed by the extended plate-type external fixator. Conclusions The plate-type external fixator is stiffer and stronger than the traditional unilateral external fixator under axial compression, four-point bending and torsion loading conditions.