Off-campus University of Miami users: To download campus access theses, please use the following link to log into our proxy server with your University of Miami CaneID and Password.

Non-University of Miami users: Please talk to your librarian about requesting this thesis through interlibrary loan.

Publication Date

2008-01-01

Availability

UM campus only

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science (MS)

Department

Biomedical Engineering (Engineering)

Date of Defense

2008-04-14

First Committee Member

Loren Latta - Committee Chair

Second Committee Member

Barry Lieber - Committee Member

Third Committee Member

Peter Tarjan - Committee Member

Abstract

Fracture of the distal radius is one of the most frequent injuries, and it represents about 20% of all adults taken into emergency rooms. A number of studies suggest various methods to reduce the dislocation and to secure fragments of the distal radius. In this study, the Non-Bridging External Wrist Fixator System (NBX), a pre-market-released product manufactured by NUTEK Inc. was biomechanically assessed by comparing with the Universal Distal Radius System (Volar Plate Fixator: VPF), a market-released product manufactured by Stryker Co. The comparison was performed in several parameters, which were wrist motion, radial tilt angle, radial length, volar tilt angle, stiffness, and failure load. Five pairs of fresh human cadaver arms were used for this study. The wrists were tested to obtain x-ray images for 1 normal and 2 injury conditions (intact, fractured, and fixed), 2 load conditions (gravity only and torque applied), and 4 postural conditions (volar flexion, dorsiflexion, ulnar deviation, and radial deviation). These tests yielded 24 (3×2×4) x-ray images for each wrist, and the images were analyzed to obtain the data for each parameter. Although the results were not statistically significant in some conditions, NBX fixation limited wrist motion more than VPF fixation. This result can be explained not only by the difference in the ability of fixation, but also by the difference in the surgical trauma (NBX is less invasive than VPF). Furthermore, in the measurement of radial tilt angle, radial length, and volar tilt angle, NBX was more effective than VPF to reduce and secure the bone fragments of the distal radius. In destructive test, the NBX is less strong than VPF. However, NBX is strong enough to sustain the expected forces of daily activity.

Keywords

First Assistant Wrist Reduction Device; Reduction; Failure Load; Stiffness; Volar Tilt Angle; Radial Length; Radial Tilt Angle; C3.2; K-wire

Share

COinS