The presented Master’s Thesis aims at determining stress and strain distribution in proximal femur with applied PCCP and DHS systems. The DHS system has been widely and successfully used for treating intertrochanteric fractures of proximal femur; in some cases, however, complications concerning implant cut-out and excessive fracture collapse occur. To minimize the risk of stabilization failure, the PCCP system was designed. In the Thesis, the process of creating the numerical model is described and the results obtained by employing Finite Element Method are presented. The 3D models of implants’ geometry were created based on the real objects. The model of proximal femur geometry was built by utilizing a series of CT scans and divided into two bodies with respect to the AO classification afterwards. The loading was obtained by solving the static equilibrium equations for the loose lower extremity. The computation was run in Ansys Workbench v13 software. In the hip screws of the PCCP system, lower values of equivalent stress can be found when compared to the DHS system. However, the equivalent strain generated in the proximal fragment is 3-times higher when the PCCP system is employed than in case of DHS system which may be due to the self-cutting design of PCCP screws. By employing PCCP system, the risk of implant failure is decreased. On the other hand, the bone tissue of the proximal fragment in close vicinity of the implant screws seems to be overloaded and prone to collapse.

O estudo fez comparações entre a intensidade e a distribuição das deformações a que fica submetido o fêmur proximal intacto e o fêmur proximal fraturado e implantado com o sistema parafuso deslizante Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, em fraturas transtrocantéricas do tipo 31 - A2 – 2. Para isso, foram produzidas deformações, mediante carregamentos cíclicos, em fadiga. As amostras constituíram-se de ossos de fêmur sintéticos, intactos, e de ossos de fêmur sintéticos onde foram feitos cortes em laboratório produzindo situações de fratura do tipo 31 –A2.2. Nas amostras fraturadas foram colocadas as placas DHS simulando situações reais de osteossíntese. Os conjuntos de ossos mais placas foram então submetidos a ensaios de fadiga. Os resultados demonstraram que as presenças da fratura e do implante DHS alteraram a amplitude das deformações em todas as regiões do fêmur. Houve absorção da carga pelo implante DHS em todas as regiões de medição. Na região do colo femoral, o DHS absorveu 98% da carga, na região lateral 97%, no centro medial transversal 48%, no centro medial longitudinal 92%, no centro medial a 45 graus 94%, no calcar, antes da linha da fratura, 80%, na região do calcar, depois da linha da fratura, 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical transversal 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical longitudinal 73% e na região do segundo parafuso cortical a 45 graus 92%. A região do centro do pino guia e a região do segundo parafuso cortical foram as regiões de maior instabilidade mecânica. Para as condições de fratura do tipo 31 – A2.2 o implante do tipo DHS não absorve totalmente as deformações geradas, apresentando mobilidade do foco da fratura. Pequenas oscilações entre os ensaios causaram modificações importantes nos resultados, indicando que a relação ponto de medição ou a posição exata do implante podem implicar num desgaste ou afrouxamento prematuro do mesmo devido a uma sobrecarga. / The study compared the intensity and distribution of the deformations to the intact proximal femur and the proximal femur fractured and implanted with the slide screw system, Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, in transtrochanteric fractures, 31 – A2 – 2 type. In this way, deformations were produced, by means of cyclic loads, in fatigue. The samples consisted of synthetic femoral bones intact and synthetic femoral bones that were cut in the laboratory producing fracture situations of type 31 – A2.2 type. In the fractured samples the DHS plates were placed simulating real osteosynthesis situations. The bone sets and plaques were then subjected to fatigue testing. The results showed that the presence of fracture and DHS implant altered the amplitude of deformations in all regions of the femur. The load was absorbed by the DHS implant in all measurement regions. In the femoral neck region, DHS absorbed 98% of the load, in the lateral region 97%, in the medial center – transverse – 48%, in the medial center – longitudinal – 92%, in the medial center – 45 degrees – 94%, in the calcar region, before the fracture line 80%, in the calcar region, after the fracture line, 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – transverse – 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – longitudinal – 73% and in the region of the second cortical screw – 45 degrees – 92% . The region of the center of the guide pin and the region of the second cortical screw were the regions of greater mechanical instability. For fracture conditions of type 31 - A2.2, the DHS type implant does not totally absorb the generated deformations, presenting mobility of the fracture focus. Small oscillations between the tests caused significant changes in the results, indicating that the relationship between the point of measurement and the exact position of the implant may lead to premature wear or loosening of the implant due to an overload.

O estudo fez comparações entre a intensidade e a distribuição das deformações a que fica submetido o fêmur proximal intacto e o fêmur proximal fraturado e implantado com o sistema parafuso deslizante Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, em fraturas transtrocantéricas do tipo 31 - A2 – 2. Para isso, foram produzidas deformações, mediante carregamentos cíclicos, em fadiga. As amostras constituíram-se de ossos de fêmur sintéticos, intactos, e de ossos de fêmur sintéticos onde foram feitos cortes em laboratório produzindo situações de fratura do tipo 31 –A2.2. Nas amostras fraturadas foram colocadas as placas DHS simulando situações reais de osteossíntese. Os conjuntos de ossos mais placas foram então submetidos a ensaios de fadiga. Os resultados demonstraram que as presenças da fratura e do implante DHS alteraram a amplitude das deformações em todas as regiões do fêmur. Houve absorção da carga pelo implante DHS em todas as regiões de medição. Na região do colo femoral, o DHS absorveu 98% da carga, na região lateral 97%, no centro medial transversal 48%, no centro medial longitudinal 92%, no centro medial a 45 graus 94%, no calcar, antes da linha da fratura, 80%, na região do calcar, depois da linha da fratura, 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical transversal 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical longitudinal 73% e na região do segundo parafuso cortical a 45 graus 92%. A região do centro do pino guia e a região do segundo parafuso cortical foram as regiões de maior instabilidade mecânica. Para as condições de fratura do tipo 31 – A2.2 o implante do tipo DHS não absorve totalmente as deformações geradas, apresentando mobilidade do foco da fratura. Pequenas oscilações entre os ensaios causaram modificações importantes nos resultados, indicando que a relação ponto de medição ou a posição exata do implante podem implicar num desgaste ou afrouxamento prematuro do mesmo devido a uma sobrecarga. / The study compared the intensity and distribution of the deformations to the intact proximal femur and the proximal femur fractured and implanted with the slide screw system, Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, in transtrochanteric fractures, 31 – A2 – 2 type. In this way, deformations were produced, by means of cyclic loads, in fatigue. The samples consisted of synthetic femoral bones intact and synthetic femoral bones that were cut in the laboratory producing fracture situations of type 31 – A2.2 type. In the fractured samples the DHS plates were placed simulating real osteosynthesis situations. The bone sets and plaques were then subjected to fatigue testing. The results showed that the presence of fracture and DHS implant altered the amplitude of deformations in all regions of the femur. The load was absorbed by the DHS implant in all measurement regions. In the femoral neck region, DHS absorbed 98% of the load, in the lateral region 97%, in the medial center – transverse – 48%, in the medial center – longitudinal – 92%, in the medial center – 45 degrees – 94%, in the calcar region, before the fracture line 80%, in the calcar region, after the fracture line, 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – transverse – 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – longitudinal – 73% and in the region of the second cortical screw – 45 degrees – 92% . The region of the center of the guide pin and the region of the second cortical screw were the regions of greater mechanical instability. For fracture conditions of type 31 - A2.2, the DHS type implant does not totally absorb the generated deformations, presenting mobility of the fracture focus. Small oscillations between the tests caused significant changes in the results, indicating that the relationship between the point of measurement and the exact position of the implant may lead to premature wear or loosening of the implant due to an overload.

O estudo fez comparações entre a intensidade e a distribuição das deformações a que fica submetido o fêmur proximal intacto e o fêmur proximal fraturado e implantado com o sistema parafuso deslizante Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, em fraturas transtrocantéricas do tipo 31 - A2 – 2. Para isso, foram produzidas deformações, mediante carregamentos cíclicos, em fadiga. As amostras constituíram-se de ossos de fêmur sintéticos, intactos, e de ossos de fêmur sintéticos onde foram feitos cortes em laboratório produzindo situações de fratura do tipo 31 –A2.2. Nas amostras fraturadas foram colocadas as placas DHS simulando situações reais de osteossíntese. Os conjuntos de ossos mais placas foram então submetidos a ensaios de fadiga. Os resultados demonstraram que as presenças da fratura e do implante DHS alteraram a amplitude das deformações em todas as regiões do fêmur. Houve absorção da carga pelo implante DHS em todas as regiões de medição. Na região do colo femoral, o DHS absorveu 98% da carga, na região lateral 97%, no centro medial transversal 48%, no centro medial longitudinal 92%, no centro medial a 45 graus 94%, no calcar, antes da linha da fratura, 80%, na região do calcar, depois da linha da fratura, 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical transversal 81%, na região do segundo parafuso cortical longitudinal 73% e na região do segundo parafuso cortical a 45 graus 92%. A região do centro do pino guia e a região do segundo parafuso cortical foram as regiões de maior instabilidade mecânica. Para as condições de fratura do tipo 31 – A2.2 o implante do tipo DHS não absorve totalmente as deformações geradas, apresentando mobilidade do foco da fratura. Pequenas oscilações entre os ensaios causaram modificações importantes nos resultados, indicando que a relação ponto de medição ou a posição exata do implante podem implicar num desgaste ou afrouxamento prematuro do mesmo devido a uma sobrecarga. / The study compared the intensity and distribution of the deformations to the intact proximal femur and the proximal femur fractured and implanted with the slide screw system, Dynamic Hip Screw – DHS, in transtrochanteric fractures, 31 – A2 – 2 type. In this way, deformations were produced, by means of cyclic loads, in fatigue. The samples consisted of synthetic femoral bones intact and synthetic femoral bones that were cut in the laboratory producing fracture situations of type 31 – A2.2 type. In the fractured samples the DHS plates were placed simulating real osteosynthesis situations. The bone sets and plaques were then subjected to fatigue testing. The results showed that the presence of fracture and DHS implant altered the amplitude of deformations in all regions of the femur. The load was absorbed by the DHS implant in all measurement regions. In the femoral neck region, DHS absorbed 98% of the load, in the lateral region 97%, in the medial center – transverse – 48%, in the medial center – longitudinal – 92%, in the medial center – 45 degrees – 94%, in the calcar region, before the fracture line 80%, in the calcar region, after the fracture line, 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – transverse – 81%, in the region of the second cortical screw – longitudinal – 73% and in the region of the second cortical screw – 45 degrees – 92% . The region of the center of the guide pin and the region of the second cortical screw were the regions of greater mechanical instability. For fracture conditions of type 31 - A2.2, the DHS type implant does not totally absorb the generated deformations, presenting mobility of the fracture focus. Small oscillations between the tests caused significant changes in the results, indicating that the relationship between the point of measurement and the exact position of the implant may lead to premature wear or loosening of the implant due to an overload.

Abstract The purposes of the present research were (1) to analyse and characterize the hip fractures treated at Oulu University Hospital during a one-year period using the special forms of the Standardized Audit of Hip Fractures in Europe (SAHFE) and to evaluate their value for quality control, (2) to compare gamma nail (GN) and dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation for the treatment of trochanteric hip fractures, focusing especially on the functional aspects, (3) to compare the short-term outcome of gamma nail (GN) and dynamic hip screw (DHS) fixation for the treatment of subtrochanteric hip fractures, and (4) to examine the rate and reliability of the classification of basicervical hip fractures and the outcome of the operative methods used for their treatment. Oulu University Hospital joined the Swedish Hip Fracture Project (Rikshöft), aimed at developing the quality control of hip fracture treatment, in 1989, and this later evolved into a project called the Standardized Audit of Hip Fractures in Europe (SAHFE), funded by the European Commission. Registration of hip fractures on the SAHFE forms was common practise in Oulu from 1st September 1997 until the end of December 2003. SAHFE data collection forms were used in all four studies belonging to this thesis. There were 238 hip fracture patients during the one-year period of registration at Oulu University Hospital. The intracapsular / extracapsular fracture rate (60/40) and the female/male rate (80/20) seemed to be similar to those reported in the recent Finnish Health Care Register data. The most frequent method for treating cervical fractures was Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty (68%) and that for trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures GN fixation (86%). The SAHFE forms proved to be easy to use and practicable for evaluating the quality of hip fracture treatment. In a matched-pair study the short-term outcomes of the treatment of trochanteric fractures (after 4 months) were slightly better in the DHS group than in the GN group with respect to walking ability and mortality. The difference in mortality was at least partly due to the higher number of complications requiring re-operations associated with GN fixation. In the treatment of subtrochanteric hip fractures, there were four intraoperative complications (9.3%) in the GN group but none in the DHS group. On the other hand, postoperative complications were more common in the DHS group (20% vs. 2%). It is significant that all these complications in the DHS group occurred in Seinsheimer type IIIA fractures. It is concluded that, despite the perioperative problems associated with gamma nailing, this technique may be preferable to DHS fixation for specific fracture types with medial cortical comminutation, such as Seinsheimer type IIIA. Altogether 108 of the 1624 hip fractures were initially classified by the surgeons as basicervical fractures, but after a careful second look only 30 fulfilled all the criteria. The definitive rate of basicervical fractures was thus 1.8%. Treatment of basicervical fractures as trochanteric fractures proved superior to their treatment as cervical fractures, resulting in lower re-operation rates. In conclusions; this thesis suggests that SAHFE forms are very useful for evaluating the quality of hip fracture treatment. Both GN fixation and DHS fixation are effective methods for the treatment of trochanteric hip fractures in elderly patients; in less comminuted fractures, the DHS method is the preferred method of treatment whereas GN fixation is alternative treatment for more comminuted fractures. GN fixation is preferable for the subtrochanteric fratures. Basicervical fractures shoud be regarded clinically as extracapsular fractures and managed in a similar manner to trochanteric fractures.