Notifications
4 minutes, 52 seconds
-0 Views 0 Comments 0 Likes 0 Reviews
Orthopedic implants have revolutionized bone fracture treatment, enabling quicker recovery and improved outcomes for patients. Among these implants, bone plates are essential tools for stabilizing fractures. Two primary types of bone plates are locking bone plates and conventional non-locking bone plates. While both serve the common purpose of fixing fractures, their design, mechanism of action, and clinical applications differ significantly. Let’s explore these differences.
A conventional bone plate is a simple metallic plate that is fixed to the bone using cortical or cancellous screws. These screws pass through the plate’s holes and are threaded into the bone to secure the plate in place. The screws rely on the friction between the plate and the bone surface for stability.
A locking bone plate has threaded holes designed to accommodate locking screws. These screws have threads at both ends—one that engages the bone and the other that locks securely into the plate. This creates a fixed-angle construct where the plate and screws function as a single unit.
In conventional systems, stability is achieved through compression between the plate and the bone. The screws act as anchors, pressing the plate tightly against the bone. While effective, this design relies heavily on the quality of the bone, making it less ideal for patients with weak or osteoporotic bones.
Locking plates offer stability without requiring the plate to compress against the bone. The fixed-angle construct provides stability through mechanical locking between the plate and screws. This feature makes them more effective in situations where bone quality is compromised.
The reliance on plate-to-bone compression can disrupt the periosteal blood supply, potentially delaying bone healing. Additionally, if the bone quality is poor, the screws may loosen over time, leading to implant failure.
Locking plates preserve the periosteal blood supply because they don’t require direct compression against the bone. They distribute forces evenly across the construct, reducing stress on individual screws and minimizing the risk of implant failure, even in weaker bones.
Conventional plates are typically used for simple fractures in patients with good bone quality. They are cost-effective and sufficient for cases where bone healing is expected to progress normally.
Locking plates are particularly useful in complex fractures, osteoporotic bones, or fractures near joints where maintaining alignment is critical. Their ability to provide stable fixation in challenging scenarios has made them a preferred choice for many surgeons.
These plates are generally more affordable and widely available. They have been used for decades and remain a staple in orthopedic surgery.
Locking plates are more expensive due to their advanced design and technology. However, their superior performance in specific clinical situations justifies the cost for many patients.
The choice between a locking bone plate and a conventional bone plate depends on various factors, including fracture type, bone quality, and patient needs. While conventional plates are effective for routine fractures, locking plates provide a reliable solution for more complex cases. As advancements in orthopedic technology continue, the use of locking plates is expected to grow, enhancing patient outcomes and expanding treatment possibilities.
To explore the latest and advanced healthcare products and supplies including orthopedic devices, register for Arab Health 2025.
