Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

A Finite Element Study about CAM-Out Failure of the Recess-Screwdriver Interfaces for the Cold-Welded Periarticular Fixation

  • C.-Y. Chien (a1), W.-H. Chuang (a2), W.-C. Tsai (a3), S.-C. Lin (a4), Y.-P. Luh (a5) and Y.-J. Chen (a6)...

Abstract

In clinical practice, cam-out failure at the recess-screwdriver interfaces may occur when tightening or removing a bone screw. For titanium-based periarticular fixation, the literature reports have revealed that cold welding at the plate-screw interfaces makes the screw recess especially prone to cam-out failure during screw removal. In this study, the effects of the four recess shapes (cross, hexagon, star, and crest), three torque value (0.8, 1.0, and 1.2N-m), and the three interfacial misfits (0.00, 0.05, and 0.10mm) on the cam-out failure were numerically evaluated. The free-rotation angle, torque-recess angle, slippage-resisting length, and interfacial stress distribution were defined and chosen as comparison indices for the twelve recess-misfit variations. The results revealed that the interfacial slippage, torque transfer, and stress distribution are highly related to both recess shape and interfacial misfit. The stresses of all recesses and screwdrivers consistently initiate at the contact sites. However, the recess profile significantly affects the stress propagation. The stress patterns of the recess and screwdriver are quite different between the cross-star and hexagon-crest groups. The cross-star group is superior to the hexagon-crest group in terms of the torque-recess angle and slippage-resisting length over. This makes the recess of the cross-star group less stressed than its counterpart. However, the volumes of the cross and the star screwdriver are more highly stressed than the hexagon due to the irregular shape and the thinner flange, respectively. The greater torque and misfit increase the performance difference between the four recess designs. In conclusion, the geometry of the cross and star groups provide the better performance of the screw recess in terms of torque-transferring efficiency and slippage-resisting ability. If the screwdriver material is properly strengthened and the stress-concentrating corners are modified, the cross and star groups would be the optimal designs that protects and extends the lifetime of both recess and reused screwdriver.

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Corresponding author (orthodent.cax@gmail.com)

References

Hide All
1. Kumar, G. and Dunlop, C., “Case Report: A Technique to Remove a Jammed Locking Screw from a Journal of Mechanics 7 Locking Plate,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 469, pp. 613616 (2010).
2. Georgiadis, G. M., Gove, N. K., Smith, A. D. and Rodway, I. P., “Removal of the Less Invasive Stabilization System,” Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 18, pp. 562564 (2004).
3. Behring, J. K., Gjerdet, N. R. and Mølster, A., “Slippage Between Screwdriver and Bone Screw,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 404, pp. 368372 (2002).
4. Klein, S. A., Kenney, N. A., Nyland, J. A. and Seligson, D., “Evaluation of Cruciate and Slot Auxiliary Screw Head Design Modifications for Extracting Stripped Screw Heads,” Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, 73, pp. 772777 (2007).
5. Morri, James C., Something New: A Different Screwdriver. http://www.hometownannapolis.com/news/top/2005/12/16-37 (2005).
6. Liu, Q., Olson, D. R., Tiley, F. W., Shea, M., Smits, M. and Hart, R. A., “Biomechanical Comparison of a Novel Multilevel Hex-Head Pedicle Screw Design with a Conventional Head Design,” Journal of Orthopaedic Research, 25, pp. 11151120 (2007).
7. Klein, S. A., Kenney, N. A., Nyland, J. A. and Seligson, D., “Evaluation of Cruciate and Slot Auxiliary Screw Head Design Modifications for Extracting Stripped Screw Heads,” Acta Orthopaedica Belgica, 73, pp. 772777 (2007).
8. Behring, J. K., Gjerdet, N. R. and Mølster, A., “Slip-page Between Screwdriver and Bone Screw,” Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 404, pp. 368372 (2002).
9. Suzuki, T., Smith, W. R., Stahel, P. F., Morgan, S. J., Baron, A. J. and Hak, D. J., “Technical Problems and Complications in the Removal of the Less Invasive Stabilization System,” Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 24, pp. 369373 (2010).
10. Hamilton, P., Doig, S. and Williamson, O., “Technical Difficulty of Metal Removal After LISS Plating,” Injury, 35, pp. 626628 (2004).
11. Cole, P. A., Zlowodzki, M. and Kregor, P. J., “Treatment of Proximal Tibia Fractures Using the Less Invasive Stabilization System: Surgical Experience and Early Clinical Results in 77 Fractures,” Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 18, pp. 528535 (2004).
12. Norton, M. R., “Assessment of Cold Welding Properties of the Internal Conical Interface of Two Commercially Available Implant Systems,” Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 81, pp. 159166 (1999).
13. Ehlinger, M., Adam, P., Simon, P. and Bonnomet, F., “Technical Difficulties in Hardware Removal in Titanium Compression Plates with Locking Screws,” Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research, 95, pp. 373376 (2009).
14. Bae, J. H., Oh, J. K., Oh, C. W. and Hur, C. R., “Technical Difficulties of Removal of Locking Screw After Locking Compression Plating,” Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 129, pp. 9195 (2009).
16. Kayabasi, O., Yüzbasioglu, E. and Erzincanli, F., “Static, Dynamic and Fatigue Behaviors of Dental Implant Using Finite Element Method,” Advances in Engineering Software, 37, pp. 649658 (2006).

Keywords

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed