No abstract

After a short historical review of locking bone plates since their inception more than a century ago to the success of the concept less than 15 years ago with today's plates, the authors present the main locking mechanisms in use. In the two broad categories - plates with fixed angulation and those with variable angulation - the screw head is locked in the plate with a locknut by screwing in a threaded chamber on the plate or by screwing through an adapted ring. The authors then provide a concrete explanation, based on simple mechanical models, of the fundamental differences between conventional bone plates and locking plates and why a locking screw system presents greater resistance at disassembly, detailing the role played by the position and number of screws. The advantages of epiphyseal fixation are then discussed, including in cases of mediocre-quality bone. For teaching purposes, the authors also present assembly with an apple fixed with five locking screws withstanding a 47-kg axial load with no resulting disassembly. The principles of plate placement are detailed for both the epiphysis and diaphysis, including the number and position of screws and respect of the soft tissues, with the greatest success assured by the minimally invasive and even percutaneous techniques. The authors then present the advantages of locking plates in fixation of periprosthetic fractures where conventional osteosynthesis often encounters limited success. Based on simplified theoretical cases, the economic impact in France of this type of implant is discussed, showing that on average it accounts for less than 10% of the overall cost of this pathology to society. Finally, the possible problems of material ablation are discussed as well as the means to remediate these problems.

The intraoperative and early postoperative mechanical complications of a procedure combining an atrial screw-in lead and a ventricular screw-in lead insertion were prospectively evaluated. The procedure was performed in 119 consecutive patients (mean age 69 +/- 8 years), at first implant in 100 patients and at reoperation in 19. Nine patients had previously undergone cardiac surgery and three underwent transvenous ventricular defibrillator implantation. The double sets of leads were introduced through 2 separate veins in 5 cases, through a single venous route in 114 cases, using a percutaneous approach in 75 cases and a venous cutdown in 49, and a guidewire procedure following the venotomy in 19. The screw was mannitol coated in 102 cases, exposed in 111, and extendable/retractable in 25. The fixation of the ventricular lead was performed at the apex in 108 cases, at the outflow tract in 11, and was followed by the fixation of the atrial lead at the appendage in 112 cases and at the lateral wall in 7 cases. The lead positioning and fixation were successful at first attempt in 103 cases and after repeated lead manipulation in 19 cases. The rotational torque could be transferred to the helix in all cases except in one patient who required a second vein puncture. Unintentional fixation in the ventricular chamber with subsequent failure to remove the lead occurred in one patient. Reoperation for lead dislodgment was required in two patients. In one patient, symptomatic pericarditis with pericardial effusion was observed 1 day after the procedure and resolved spontaneously. Dual active fixation is feasible with a low incidence of mechanical complications.

No abstract

No abstract