Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Mar 15:70:1-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2025.03.021. eCollection 2025 Dec.

Comparison of biomechanics between two different external fixation methods in the treatment of A1b tibial fractures based on finite element analysis

Jinkun Guo  1   2 , Ling Zhang  3 , Shitao Fang  4 , Yun Wang  5 , Ming Zhang  2 , Lei Mi  2   1
Affiliations

Comparison of biomechanics between two different external fixation methods in the treatment of A1b tibial fractures based on finite element analysis

Jinkun Guo et al. J Orthop. .

Abstract

Objective: To compare the biomechanical stability between two different external fixation methods (locked steel plates versus external fixation frame) for the treatment of A1b tibial fractures based on finite element analysis, and to provide theoretical reference for clinical application.

Methods: Based on CT data of the left tibia from a healthy male volunteer, a normal three-dimensional (3D) tibial model was constructed using modeling software, which was further derived into a A1b tibial fracture model. Then, On the basis of the fracture model constructed above, the finite element models of locking compression plate and unilateral external fixator were fixed respectively. Further, 4 different test conditions (i.e., 4-point bending, axial compression, clockwise torsion, and counterclockwise torsion) were simulated under the same loading and constraint conditions for both models, in order to comparatively evaluate the equivalent peak stress and peak overall displacement of the fracture site between the two methods.

Results: From the experimental data corresponding to the maximum load under 4 different test conditions, it was found that the peak stress of tibia and the equivalent peak stress of fractured tibia with external fixation was roughly ranged 49.16-269.59 MPa and 34.99-559.58 MPa in the two fixation methods under various test conditions. Overall, external fracture fixation with locked steel plates showed a greater equivalent peak stress and a smaller peak overall tibial displacement than that with external fixation frame did.

Conclusions: Locked steel plates may be superior external fixation frame in terms of biomechanical properties in the treatment of A1b tibial fractures, and can be used as an alternative option for patients who cannot tolerate external fixation frame.

Keywords: Biomechanics; External fixation frame; Finite element; Locked steel plate.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There is no conflict of interest between authors.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Ekegren C., Edwards E., DE Steiger R., et al. Incidence, costs and predictors of non-union, delayed union and mal-union following long bone fracture. Int J Environ Res Publ Health. 2018;15(12):2845. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Li Y., Jiang X., Guo Q., et al. Treatment of distal tibial shaft fractures by three different surgical methods: a randomized, prospective study. Int Orthop. 2014;38(6):1261–1267. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Xue H., Deng J., Zhang Z., et al. Different internal fixation methods for Hoffa-like fractures of the tibial plateau: a finite element analysis. Front Med. 2023;10 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Wang J., xiong M.A.J., bo J.I.A.H., et al. Biomechanical evaluation of four methods for internal fixation of comminuted subtrochanteric fractures. Medicine. 2016;95(19) - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hao Z.C., Xia Y., Xia D.M., et al. Treatment of open tibial diaphyseal fractures by external fixation combined with limited internal fixation versus simple external fixation: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Muscoskelet Disord. 2019;20(1):311. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources