The missing piece of the trauma armoury-medial femoral condyle plate. Issue 3 (March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Upadhyay, Piyush; Syed, Farhan; Ramoutar, Darryl N; Ward, Jayne
• Is Part Of: Injury. Volume 53:Issue 3(2022)
• Page Start: 1237
• Page End: 1240
• Publication Date: 2022-03
• Subjects: Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Periodicals; Wounds and Injuries -- surgery -- Periodicals; Lésions et blessures -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2021.11.034
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-1383

Abstract

Highlights: This is the first study that compared 18 different anatomical plates to look for best fit for fixation of medial distal femur for fractures. Augmented fixation should be considered while fixing distal femur fractures to improve stability and allow early weight bearing. Ipsilateral anterolateral proximal tibial plates with variable angle option provides best fit while fixing medial distal femur. Abstract: Fixation of distal femoral fractures is often challenging due to the fracture configuration and associated poor bone quality. Dual plating (lateral and medial) has become an acceptable option to provide improved stability versus a single plate fixation. Though there are several commercially available anatomically designed plates for the lateral femoral condyle, there is no anatomic plate available in UK specifically for medial fixation of distal femur fractures. Our aim is to determine the best suited pre-contoured plate for stabilising the medial femoral condyle (MFC). Right sided femur sawbones were used to determine how well 18 different pre-contoured anatomical plates (Depuy Synthes, Leeds, UK) fit the medial femoral condyle. Some of these had variable angle (VA) option. Lift off, fit and notch penetration were assessed and recorded independently by 4 orthopaedic trauma surgeons. The number and distribution of screws in the MFC that each plate allowed was also determined. To do this the MFC was divided into quadrants: Proximal anterior (PA), distal anterior (DA), proximal posterior (PP) and distal posterior (DP). The ipsilateral anterolateral proximal tibial (VA and 4.5 mm non-VA), PHILOS, posteromedial proximal tibial and ipsilateral lateral extra-articular distal humeral plate offered good sagittal fit, less than 2 mm lift off at the condyles and no diaphyseal lift off. Plate positioning in the PA quadrant offered the best fit. The ipsilateral anterolateral proximal tibial plates (VA) and PHILOS allowed at least 4 screws to be placed in the PA and 2 in the PP quadrant with no notch penetration. The Tomofix provided good fit, but all 4 screws were in PA quadrant, with distal screws causing notch penetration. The non-VA and PHILOS plates did not offer the VA advantage. The ipsilateral anterolateral proximal tibial VA plates provided the best anatomical fit for the MFC with the greatest number of screws in the condylar quadrants with the option of variable angle screw placement.