The effect of pearl spacing on single-cycle load-to-failure and cyclic loading parameters of 2.0 mm pearl locking plates

ABSTRACT

Aims

To compare the mechanical performance and mode of failure in four-point bending of two different 2.0 mm “string of pearls” locking plates that differ in dimensions.

Methods

Ten *2.0 mm, 82 mm long, 10-hole (Plate A) and ten 2.0 mm, 69 mm long, 12-hole (Plate B) Cortical Pearl Systems were secured to plate extenders and centred beneath an Instron tensile tester in four-point bending. In all constructs, a simulated fracture gap was maintained at 33 mm. Due to differences in plate dimensions, 33 mm corresponded to four pearls (Plate A) and six pearls (Plate B). Following an initial preload of 10 N, ramped single-cycle load-to-failure at 0.1 mm/second was performed in five Plate A and five Plate B constructs. Load and displacement were recorded. Constant frequency sinusoidal cyclic loading (33 N) at 20 mm/minute was performed on five Plate A and five Plate B constructs following 10 N of preload. Maximum moment and cycle count were recorded. Testing and data analysis were completed in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials F382-14 guidelines. Differences in performance and mode of failure were compared.

Results

: Plate A constructs produced higher mean values for bending stiffness (19.8 (SD 2.0) N/mm vs. 10.1 (SD 0.6) N/mm; p < 0.001), bending structural stiffness (0.77 (SD 0.08) Nm² vs. 0.39 (SD 0.02) Nm²; p < 0.001), yield point (64.1 (SD 4.2) N vs. 54.6 (SD 3.9) N; p = 0.01), proof load (65.4 (SD 3.2) N vs. 55.6 (SD 4.0) N; p = 0.005), and bending strength (1.3 (SD 0.1) Nm vs. 1.1 (SD 0.08) Nm; p = 0.005) when compared to Plate B constructs in single cycle load-to-failure. Plate A constructs had a greater (p = 0.001) mean cycle count to failure (26,178 (SD 4,061) cycles) when compared with Plate B constructs (15,550 (SD 1,291) cycles). All plates failed by non-catastrophic plastic deformation.

Conclusions

Plate A, which is wider, thicker and has a greater spacing between pearls, was mechanically superior to Plate B in four-point bending under single-cycle load-to-failure and sinusoidal cyclic loading.

Clinical relevance

Although mechanical differences were identified in four-point bending, in vivo biomechanical performance remains undetermined. By selecting Plate B, the clinician may gain bone purchase through a greater number of pearls and thus screws per unit length, however, the inferior mechanical characteristics, as evaluated in four-point bending, should also be considered. Further research into the mechanical and biomechanical performance of these plating systems is warranted.

KEYWORDS:

• Cortical Pearl System
• four-point bending
• fracture repair
• locking plate
• String of Pearls

Acknowledgements

Anthony Wade, from the School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Massey University, (Palmerston North, NZ), generously provided time and expertise in the implementation of mechanical testing. Furthermore, Mr Wade designed the custom Labview programme that was used for test configuration and data acquisition for all mechanical tests. All testing was performed in facilities and using equipment provided by the School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Massey University. Veterinary Orthopedic Implants donated the Cortical Pearl Systems that were destructively tested in this study