A Biomechanical Comparison of Fiberglass Casts and 3-Dimensional–Printed, Open-Latticed, Ventilated Casts

Paul Hoogervorst, Riley Knox, Kara Tanaka, Zachary Working, Ashraf N.El Naga, Safa Herfat, Nicolas Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the stabilizing properties of a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed short-arm cast and compare those properties with traditional fiberglass casts in a cadaveric subacute distal radius fracture model. Methods: A cadaveric subacute fracture model was created in 8 pairs of forearms. The specimens were equally allocated to a fiberglass cast or 3D-printed cast group. All specimens were subjected to 3 biomechanical testing modalities simulating daily life use: flexion and extension of digits, pronation and supination of the hand, and 3-point bending. Between each loading modality, radiological evaluation of the specimens was performed to evaluate possible interval displacement. Interfragmentary motion was quantified using a 3D motion-tracking system. Results: Radiographic assessment did not reveal statistically significant differences in radiographic parameters between the 2 groups before and after biomechanical testing. A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion was calculated with the 3-point bending test, with a mean difference of 0.44 (±0.48) mm of motion. Conclusions: A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion between the 2 casting groups was only identified in 3-point bending. However, the clinical relevance of this motion remains unclear as the absolute motion is less than 1 mm. The results of this study show noninferiority of the 3D-printed casts compared with the traditional fiberglass casts in immobilizing a subacute distal radius fracture model. These results support the execution of a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing both casting techniques.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalHand
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Surgical Casts
Radius Fractures
Pronation
Supination
Forearm
Arm
Randomized Controlled Trials
Hand

Keywords

  • 3D printing
  • additive manufacturing
  • biomechanics
  • distal radius
  • fracture cast

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

A Biomechanical Comparison of Fiberglass Casts and 3-Dimensional–Printed, Open-Latticed, Ventilated Casts. / Hoogervorst, Paul; Knox, Riley; Tanaka, Kara; Working, Zachary; Naga, Ashraf N.El; Herfat, Safa; Lee, Nicolas.

In: Hand, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hoogervorst, Paul ; Knox, Riley ; Tanaka, Kara ; Working, Zachary ; Naga, Ashraf N.El ; Herfat, Safa ; Lee, Nicolas. / A Biomechanical Comparison of Fiberglass Casts and 3-Dimensional–Printed, Open-Latticed, Ventilated Casts. In: Hand. 2019.
@article{c5b7d393b58b49a2b6e4c79668cf4323,
title = "A Biomechanical Comparison of Fiberglass Casts and 3-Dimensional–Printed, Open-Latticed, Ventilated Casts",
abstract = "Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the stabilizing properties of a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed short-arm cast and compare those properties with traditional fiberglass casts in a cadaveric subacute distal radius fracture model. Methods: A cadaveric subacute fracture model was created in 8 pairs of forearms. The specimens were equally allocated to a fiberglass cast or 3D-printed cast group. All specimens were subjected to 3 biomechanical testing modalities simulating daily life use: flexion and extension of digits, pronation and supination of the hand, and 3-point bending. Between each loading modality, radiological evaluation of the specimens was performed to evaluate possible interval displacement. Interfragmentary motion was quantified using a 3D motion-tracking system. Results: Radiographic assessment did not reveal statistically significant differences in radiographic parameters between the 2 groups before and after biomechanical testing. A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion was calculated with the 3-point bending test, with a mean difference of 0.44 (±0.48) mm of motion. Conclusions: A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion between the 2 casting groups was only identified in 3-point bending. However, the clinical relevance of this motion remains unclear as the absolute motion is less than 1 mm. The results of this study show noninferiority of the 3D-printed casts compared with the traditional fiberglass casts in immobilizing a subacute distal radius fracture model. These results support the execution of a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing both casting techniques.",
keywords = "3D printing, additive manufacturing, biomechanics, distal radius, fracture cast",
author = "Paul Hoogervorst and Riley Knox and Kara Tanaka and Zachary Working and Naga, {Ashraf N.El} and Safa Herfat and Nicolas Lee",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1558944719831341",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Hand",
issn = "1558-9447",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Biomechanical Comparison of Fiberglass Casts and 3-Dimensional–Printed, Open-Latticed, Ventilated Casts

AU - Hoogervorst, Paul

AU - Knox, Riley

AU - Tanaka, Kara

AU - Working, Zachary

AU - Naga, Ashraf N.El

AU - Herfat, Safa

AU - Lee, Nicolas

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the stabilizing properties of a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed short-arm cast and compare those properties with traditional fiberglass casts in a cadaveric subacute distal radius fracture model. Methods: A cadaveric subacute fracture model was created in 8 pairs of forearms. The specimens were equally allocated to a fiberglass cast or 3D-printed cast group. All specimens were subjected to 3 biomechanical testing modalities simulating daily life use: flexion and extension of digits, pronation and supination of the hand, and 3-point bending. Between each loading modality, radiological evaluation of the specimens was performed to evaluate possible interval displacement. Interfragmentary motion was quantified using a 3D motion-tracking system. Results: Radiographic assessment did not reveal statistically significant differences in radiographic parameters between the 2 groups before and after biomechanical testing. A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion was calculated with the 3-point bending test, with a mean difference of 0.44 (±0.48) mm of motion. Conclusions: A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion between the 2 casting groups was only identified in 3-point bending. However, the clinical relevance of this motion remains unclear as the absolute motion is less than 1 mm. The results of this study show noninferiority of the 3D-printed casts compared with the traditional fiberglass casts in immobilizing a subacute distal radius fracture model. These results support the execution of a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing both casting techniques.

AB - Background: The aim of this study was to quantify the stabilizing properties of a 3-dimensional (3D)-printed short-arm cast and compare those properties with traditional fiberglass casts in a cadaveric subacute distal radius fracture model. Methods: A cadaveric subacute fracture model was created in 8 pairs of forearms. The specimens were equally allocated to a fiberglass cast or 3D-printed cast group. All specimens were subjected to 3 biomechanical testing modalities simulating daily life use: flexion and extension of digits, pronation and supination of the hand, and 3-point bending. Between each loading modality, radiological evaluation of the specimens was performed to evaluate possible interval displacement. Interfragmentary motion was quantified using a 3D motion-tracking system. Results: Radiographic assessment did not reveal statistically significant differences in radiographic parameters between the 2 groups before and after biomechanical testing. A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion was calculated with the 3-point bending test, with a mean difference of 0.44 (±0.48) mm of motion. Conclusions: A statistically significant difference in interfragmentary motion between the 2 casting groups was only identified in 3-point bending. However, the clinical relevance of this motion remains unclear as the absolute motion is less than 1 mm. The results of this study show noninferiority of the 3D-printed casts compared with the traditional fiberglass casts in immobilizing a subacute distal radius fracture model. These results support the execution of a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing both casting techniques.

KW - 3D printing

KW - additive manufacturing

KW - biomechanics

KW - distal radius

KW - fracture cast

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062506280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062506280&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1558944719831341

DO - 10.1177/1558944719831341

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85062506280

JO - Hand

JF - Hand

SN - 1558-9447

ER -