↓ Skip to main content

Biomechanical evaluation of shape-memory alloy staples for internal fixation—an in vitro study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Biomechanical evaluation of shape-memory alloy staples for internal fixation—an in vitro study
Published in
Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40634-016-0055-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

QiCai Jason Hoon, Matthew H. Pelletier, Chris Christou, Kenneth A. Johnson, William R. Walsh

Abstract

The field of orthopaedics is a constantly evolving discipline. Despite the historical success of plates, pins and screws in fracture reduction and stabilisation, there is a continuing search for more efficient and improved methods of fracture fixation. The aim of this study was to evaluate shape-memory staples and to compare them to a currently used implant for internal fracture fixation. Multi-plane bending stability and interfragmentary compression were assessed across a simulated osteotomy using single and double-staple fixation and compared to a bridging plate. Transverse osteotomies were made in polyurethane blocks (20 × 20 × 120 mm) and repairs were performed with one (n = 6), or two (n = 6) 20 mm nitinol staples, or an eight-hole 2.7 mm quarter-tubular plate (n = 6). A pressure film was placed between fragments to determine contact area and compressive forces before and after loading. Loading consisted of multi-planar four-point bending with an actuator displacement of 3 mm. Gapping between segments was recorded to determine loads corresponding to a 2 mm gap and residual post-load gap. Staple fixations showed statistically significant higher mean compressive loads and contact areas across the osteotomy compared to plate fixations. Double-staple constructs were superior to single-staple constructs for both parameters (p < 0.001). Double-staple constructs were significantly stiffer and endured significantly larger loads before 2 mm gap formation compared to other constructs in the dorsoventral plane (p < 0.001). However, both staple constructs were significantly less stiff and tolerated considerably lower loads before 2 mm gap formation when compared to plate constructs in the ventrodorsal and right-to-left lateral loading planes. Loading of staple constructs showed significantly reduced permanent gap formation in all planes except ventrodorsally when compared to plate constructs. Although staple fixations were not as stable as plate fixations in particular loading planes, double-staple constructs demonstrated the most consistent bending stiffness in all planes. Placing two perpendicular staples is suggested instead of single-staples whenever possible, with at least one staple applied on the compression side of the anticipated loading to improve construct stability.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 21%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Student > Master 4 17%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 46%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 29%
Materials Science 1 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2019.
All research outputs
#2,292,355
of 13,918,259 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#16
of 85 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,053
of 263,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,918,259 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 85 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,947 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them