James P. Toombs

Transarticular Application of External Skeletal Fixation

External skeletal fixators provide a useful alternative to external coaptation techniques for immobilization of joints in selected patients. This is especially true when the orthopedic injury involves an open wound requiring daily treatment. Devices such as the K-E splint, the Rudy external fixator boot, and acrylic frame fixators are economical and effective for transarticular fixation in small animal patients. Clinical indications for these techniques have included fixation of tibial or radial fractures with a short distal fragment; arthrodesis of the elbow, carpus, stifle, or tarsus; protection of Achilles tendon repairs; protection of collateral ligament repairs of the tarsocrural joint; and protection when multiple ligaments of the stifle joint have been reconstructed. Use of contoured rods has facilitated transarticular application of type II Kirschner-Ehmer splints. Use of acrylic frames and the Rudy boot technique have extended safe use of transarticular external fixation to extremely small patients not accommodated by the Kirschner system alone. An understanding of the advantages and disadvantages inherent in each of these techniques is critical to proper selection of the best method for a given patient. Attention to the basic principles of pin selection, pin insertion, and frame design are needed for successful execution of the chosen technique.

Mechanical evaluation of a tapered thread-run-out half-pin designed for external skeletal fixation in small animals

An in vitro mechanical study was performed to compare the stiffness, maximum load, and cyclic load-to-failure of a new external fixation half-pin design utilizing a tapered thread-run-out (TRO) feature with currently available positive profile thread (PP) half-pins. Five different sizes of each of the two pin types were evaluated. Under static loading, TRO pins were significantly stiffer and had a higher maximum load compared to the similar sized PP pins (p <0.0001 for all comparisons). In cyclic fatigue testing, TRO pins lasted 2.3- to 4.9-fold more cycles than PP pins of similar size (p <0.0001 for all comparisons). The increased pin stiffness and improved cyclic lifespan provided by TRO pins may be especially valuable in the stabilization of biologically and mechanically challenging fracture cases where healing is prolonged.