Biomechanical Comparison of Fixed-Angle Volar Plate Versus Fixed-Angle Volar Plate Plus Fragment-Specific Fixation in a Cadaveric Distal Radius Fracture Model

PurposeTo test the hypothesis that combining orthogonal fragment-specific fixation with volar fixed-angle fixation provides markedly higher interfragment stability and construct strength compared with volar fixed-angle fixation alone.MethodsEight matched pairs of fresh cadaveric hand and forearm specimens were potted upright in cement. Flexor and extensor tendons were isolated at insertion sites and sutured into a looped bundle for loading in flexion and extension, respectively (up to 61 N). Osteotomies to simulate an AO type C2, 3-part fracture pattern were created with a saw. One randomized specimen from each pair received a locking volar plate and a radial pin plate (VP+PP), and the other received a locking volar plate only (VP). The relative angular displacements between the radial, ulnar, and proximal fragments were obtained with a motion analysis system. After stability tests, specimens were compressed to failure in a wrist-extended position on a material testing machine. Paired t tests were used to compare the interfragment displacement, construct stiffness, and strength between the 2 groups.ResultsComparing fragment displacement in the VP+PP and VP groups showed that with flexion-extension and radial-ulnar deviation, distal fragment displacement was reduced to a statistically significant degree. The VP+PP group also showed higher failure strength and construct rigidity than the VP group.ConclusionsIn a simulated cadaveric model of the distal radius intra-articular fracture, the combined technique of fragment-specific plating with volar fixed-angle fixation alone provides superior biomechanical strength and stability over the volar fixed-angle fixation alone.