• Daniel Acevedo, Bo Nasmyth Loy, Bo Nasymuth Loy, Brian Lee, Reza Omid, and John Itamura.
• Orthopedics. 2013 Sep 1;36(9):e1175-9.

AbstractMixing implants with differing metallic compositions has been avoided for fear of galvanic corrosion and subsequent failure of the implants and of bone healing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate upper-extremity fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation with metallic implants that differed in metallic composition placed on the same bone. The authors studied the effects of using both stainless steel and titanium implants on fracture healing, implant failure, and other complications associated with this method of fixation. Their hypothesis was that combining these metals on the same bone would not cause clinically significant nonunions or undo clinical effects from galvanic corrosion. A retrospective review was performed of 17 patients with upper-extremity fractures fixed with metal implants of differing metallic compositions. The primary endpoint was fracture union. Eight clavicles, 2 proximal humeri, 3 distal humeri, 3 olecranons, and 1 glenoid fracture with an average follow-up 10 months were reviewed. All fractures healed. One patient experienced screw backout, which did not affect healing. This study implies that mixing implants with differing metallic compositions on the same bone for the treatment of fractures does not adversely affect bone healing. No evidence existed of corrosion or an increase in complications with this method of treatment. Contrary to prior belief, small modular hand stainless steel plates can be used to assist in reduction of smaller fracture fragments in combination with anatomic titanium plates to obtain anatomic reduction of the fracture without adversely affecting healing.Copyright 2013, SLACK Incorporated.

25 keywords...

hide…