A biomechanical study of conventional acetabular internal fracture fixation versus locking plate fixation.

BACKGROUND Conventional internal fixation entails the use of an interfragmentary lag screw along with a plate. Not all acetabular fractures are amenable to the placement of an interfragmentary lag screw, and the fracture may be displaced during tightening of the interfragmentary lag screw. Locking plates are a possible solution. We sought to determine whether a locking plate construct can provide stability equivalent to that provided with a conventional construct for transverse acetabular fractures. METHODS We used 5 paired fresh-frozen cadaveric acetabula. We fixed one side with the conventional technique and the other side with a locking plate. We subjected each fixation to a cyclic compressive force up to 500 cycles, followed by compressive force until failure. We monitored 3-dimensional motion of the fracture. RESULTS The average fracture gap at 50 N compressive force after 500 loading cycles was 0.41 (standard deviation [SD] 0.49) mm for the conventional plate and lag screw construct compared with 0.76 (SD 0.62) mm for the locked plate construct (p = 0.46). The force to failure, as defined by 2 mm of fracture gap, was 848 (SD 805) N for the conventional plate and lag screw construct compared with 506 (SD 277) N for the locked plate fixation (p = 0.34). CONCLUSION The locking plate construct is as strong as the conventional plate plus interfragmentary lag screw construct for fixing transverse acetabular fractures. Locking plates may improve management of acetabular fractures by eliminating the need for placement of an interfragmentary lag screw. Furthermore, they may be helpful in revision hip arthroplasty in patients with pelvic discontinuity.