Biomechanical Comparison of Fixation Methods for Posterior Wall Fractures of the Acetabulum: Conventional Reconstruction Plate vs. Spring Plate vs. Variable Angle Locking Compression Plate

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Acetabular fractures, though infrequent, present considerable challenges in treatment due to their association with high-energy trauma and poor prognoses. Posterior wall fractures, the most common type among them, typically have a more favorable prognosis compared to other types. Anatomical reduction and stable fixation of the posterior wall are crucial for optimal treatment outcomes. This study aimed to biomechanically compare three commonly used fixation methods for posterior wall fractures of the acetabulum—a conventional reconstruction plate, a spring plate, and a 2.7 mm variable angle locking compression plate (VA-LCP). Materials and Methods: The study utilized 6 fresh-frozen cadavers, yielding 12 hemipelvises free from prior trauma or surgery. Three fixation methods were compared using a simple acetabulum posterior wall fracture model. Fixation was performed by an orthopedic specialist, with prebending of plates to minimize errors. Hemipelvises were subjected to quasi-static and cyclic loading tests, measuring fracture gap, stiffness, and displacement under load. Results: It showed no significant differences in fracture gap among the three fixation methods under cyclic loading conditions simulating walking. However, the conventional reconstruction plate exhibited a greater stiffness compared to the spring and variable angle plates. Fatigue analysis revealed no significant differences among the plates, indicating a similar stability throughout cyclic loading. Despite differences in stiffness, all three fixation methods demonstrated adequate stability under loading conditions. Conclusions: While the conventional reconstruction plate demonstrated a superior stiffness, all three fixation methods provided sufficient stability under cyclic loading conditions similar to walking. This suggests that postoperative limitations are unlikely with any of the three methods, provided excessive activities are avoided. Furthermore, the variable angle plate—like the spring plate—offers an appropriate stability for fragment-specific fixation, supporting its use in surgical applications. These findings contribute to understanding the biomechanical performance of different fixation methods for acetabular fractures, facilitating improved surgical outcomes in challenging cases.

Keywords

• biomechanics
• acetabulum
• posterior wall fracture
• variable angle plate