Great debates in trauma biomechanics.
review · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 37168029.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000249 and PMC identifier 10166369.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC-ND.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
At the 2021 annual meeting of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association, the Basic Science Focus Forum hosted its first ever debate-style symposium focused on biomechanics and fracture repair. The 3 subjects of debate were "Mechanics versus Biology-Which is 'More Important' to Consider?" "Locked Plate versus Forward Dynamization versus Reverse Dynamization-Which Way Should I Go?" and "Sawbones versus Cadaver Models-What Should I Believe Most?" These debates were held because fracture healing is a highly organized synergistic response between biological factors and the local mechanical environment. Multiple studies have demonstrated that both factors play roles in governing bone healing responses, and the causal relationships between the 2 remain unclear. The lack of clarity in this space has led to a spectrum of research with the common goal of helping surgeons make good decisions. Before reading further, the reader should understand that the questions posed in the debate titles are unanswerable and might represent a false choice. Instead, the reader should appreciate that the debates were held to gain a more thorough understanding of these topics based on the current state of the art of experimental and clinical studies, by using an engaging and thought-provoking format.