Bone augmentation: Is it really needed?

[Cement augmentation and bone graft substitutes-Materials and biomechanics]

BACKGROUND

Materials with different characteristics are used for cement augmentation and as bone graft substitutes.

OBJECTIVE

Cement augmentation and bone graft substitutes are the subject of current research. The evaluation of new knowledge allows its specific application.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Selective literature search and outline of experimental research results on cement augmentation and bone graft substitutes.

RESULTS

Augmentation and bone graft substitutes are essential components of current trauma surgical procedures. Despite intensive research all materials have specific disadvantages. Cement augmentation of implants enhances not only the anchorage but also influences the failure mode.

CONCLUSION

Cement augmentation has large potential especially in osteoporotic bone. In load-bearing regions acrylic-based cements remain the standard of choice. Ceramic cements are preferred in non-load-bearing areas. Their combination with resorbable metals offers still largely unexplored potential. Virtual biomechanics can help improve the targeted application of cement augmentation.

Cement augmentation of calcar screws may provide the greatest reduction in predicted screw cut-out risk for proximal humerus plating based on validated parametric computational modelling: Augmenting proximal humerus fracture plating

Aims

Fixation of osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures remains challenging even with state-of-the-art locking plates. Despite the demonstrated biomechanical benefit of screw tip augmentation with bone cement, the clinical findings have remained unclear, potentially as the optimal augmentation combinations are unknown. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the biomechanical benefits of the augmentation options in a humeral locking plate using finite element analysis (FEA).

Methods

A total of 64 cement augmentation configurations were analyzed using six screws of a locking plate to virtually fix unstable three-part fractures in 24 low-density proximal humerus models under three physiological loading cases (4,608 simulations). The biomechanical benefit of augmentation was evaluated through an established FEA methodology using the average peri-screw bone strain as a validated predictor of cyclic cut-out failure.

Results

The biomechanical benefit was already significant with a single cemented screw and increased with the number of augmented screws, but the configuration was highly influential. The best two-screw (mean 23%, SD 3% reduction) and the worst four-screw (mean 22%, SD 5%) combinations performed similarly. The largest benefits were achieved with augmenting screws purchasing into the calcar and having posteriorly located tips. Local bone mineral density was not directly related to the improvement.

Conclusion

The number and configuration of cemented screws strongly determined how augmentation can alleviate the predicted risk of cut-out failure. Screws purchasing in the calcar and posterior humeral head regions may be prioritized. Although requiring clinical corroborations, these findings may explain the controversial results of previous clinical studies not controlling the choices of screw augmentation.