Dynamic Interfragmentary Compression Through a Tibial Intramedullary Nail Compared to Backslapping Alone: A Biomechanical Analysis

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the amount of interfragmentary compression obtained in a transverse tibia fracture model with backslapping alone (BS) versus the intramedullary nail's dynamic internal compression (IC) mechanism and if that compression is maintained after loading. METHODS: A transverse diaphyseal tibia synthetic fracture model was used. Specimens were allocated to four groups (n=5/group) that received one of two intramedullary nails (A or B) and obtained compression either with the IC device or with BS alone. Specimens underwent sinusoidal loading for 135,000 cycles of 700N @3Hz to simulate three months of weightbearing. Interfragmentary pressure measurements were measured at initial compression, procedure completion (pre-cycling) and after loading (post-cycling). Compression at each stage was compared between BS and IC groups as well as between stages. Outcomes were also compared between Nails A and B. RESULTS: There was significantly greater initial (1097N vs 167N, p<0.001) and pre-cycling (391N vs 103N, p<0.001) compression generated with IC compared to BS. The IC group also maintained greater compression than the BS group post-cycling (377N vs 75N, p<0.001). Both groups experienced significant loss of compression between initial and pre-cycling timepoints and during the cycling process (p<0.05 for all). On subanalysis, Nail B was able to generate significantly more initial compression than Nail A with the IC device (1523N vs 382N, p=0.001) and maintain it post-cycling (412N vs 205N, p=0.032). Conversely, Nail A was able to generate and maintain significantly more compression than Nail B at all three time-points with the BS technique (p<0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Intramedullary IC devices generated and maintained greater interfragmentary fracture compression than traditional BS techniques alone. However, some compressive force was lost after loading regardless of compression technique utilized. Differences in compressive force were observed between nail manufacturers with both techniques, which may suggest that nail geometry and instrumentation may contribute to fracture compression. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2026-10-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/bot.0000000000003293
Primary Topic
Bone fractures and treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Dynamic Interfragmentary Compression Through a Tibial Intramedullary Nail Compared to Backslapping Alone: A Biomechanical Analysis

Jana M. Davis, Brittany E. Haws, James A. Blair, Jonathan P. Yawman et al.
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Bone fractures and treatments
article

Dynamic Interfragmentary Compression Through a Tibial Intramedullary Nail Compared to Backslapping Alone: A Biomechanical Analysis

Jana M. Davis, Brittany E. Haws, James A. Blair, Jonathan P. Yawman, Nina Suh, James Thompson
article en

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the amount of interfragmentary compression obtained in a transverse tibia fracture model with backslapping alone (BS) versus the intramedullary nail's dynamic internal compression (IC) mechanism and if that compression is maintained after loading. METHODS: A transverse diaphyseal tibia synthetic fracture model was used. Specimens were allocated to four groups (n=5/group) that received one of two intramedullary nails (A or B) and obtained compression either with the IC device or with BS alone. Specimens underwent sinusoidal loading for 135,000 cycles of 700N @3Hz to simulate three months of weightbearing. Interfragmentary pressure measurements were measured at initial compression, procedure completion (pre-cycling) and after loading (post-cycling). Compression at each stage was compared between BS and IC groups as well as between stages. Outcomes were also compared between Nails A and B. RESULTS: There was significantly greater initial (1097N vs 167N, p<0.001) and pre-cycling (391N vs 103N, p<0.001) compression generated with IC compared to BS. The IC group also maintained greater compression than the BS group post-cycling (377N vs 75N, p<0.001). Both groups experienced significant loss of compression between initial and pre-cycling timepoints and during the cycling process (p<0.05 for all). On subanalysis, Nail B was able to generate significantly more initial compression than Nail A with the IC device (1523N vs 382N, p=0.001) and maintain it post-cycling (412N vs 205N, p=0.032). Conversely, Nail A was able to generate and maintain significantly more compression than Nail B at all three time-points with the BS technique (p<0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Intramedullary IC devices generated and maintained greater interfragmentary fracture compression than traditional BS techniques alone. However, some compressive force was lost after loading regardless of compression technique utilized. Differences in compressive force were observed between nail manufacturers with both techniques, which may suggest that nail geometry and instrumentation may contribute to fracture compression. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
University of Miami (US), Orlando Health (US), Emory University (US), University of Miami Hospital (US), Jewett Orthopaedic Clinic (US), Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Bone fractures and treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.