Comparison of Biomechanical Performance of Five Different Treatment Approaches for Fixing Posterior Pelvic Ring Injury

Table 4

Comparison of the FE predictions with the in vitro test data.

Test set-up	Biomechanical findings	References
Both iliac bones fixed, 294.0 N in superior-inferior and anterior-posterior directions, and 42 Nm moment in the flexion and lateral bending directions	Displacements at the center of the sacrum are around 0.32 mm (superior), 0.55 mm (anterior), 1.23 mm (flexion), and 0.41 mm (lateral bending)	The present study
294.0 N applied in the superior, inferior, anterior, posterior, and lateral directions of the sacroiliac joints	The mean displacements are around 0.28 mm (superior), 0.48 mm (anterior), 1.31 mm (flexion), and 0.37 mm (lateral bending)	Miller et al. [39]
Bilateral stance simulated using the intact sacroiliac joint and public symphysis	The mean displacement in the intact pelvis is around 0.2 mm in the stance posture	Varga et al. [40]
Quasistatic compressive loading applied in the pelvis	After fixation, the displacement magnitudes at the fracture sites were small (mean = 0.09 mm)	Sawaguchi et al. [41]
Cyclic increasing axial loading applied through the acetabulum	The mean displacements at the screw and plates are around 0.37 mm and 0.11 mm after 100 cyclic loading	Acklin et al. [42]