Biomechanical Evaluation of Standard Versus Extended Proximal Fixation Olecranon Plates for Fixation of Olecranon Fractures

Background: Small olecranon fractures present a significant challenge for fixation, which has resulted in development of plates with proximal extension. Olecranon-specific plates with proximal extensions are widely thought to offer superior fixation of small proximal fragments but have distinct disadvantages: larger dissection, increased hardware prominence, and the increased possibility of impingement. Previous biomechanical studies of olecranon fracture fixation have compared methods of fracture fixation, but to date there have been no studies defining olecranon plate fixation strength for standard versus extended olecranon plates. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the biomechanical utility of the extended plate for treatment of olecranon fractures. Methods: Sixteen matched pairs of fresh-frozen human cadaveric elbows were used. Of the 16, 8 matched pairs received a transverse osteotomy including 25% and 8 including 50% of the articular surface on the proximal fragment. One elbow from each pair was randomly assigned to a standard-length plate, and the other elbow in the pair received the extended-length plate, for fixation of the fracture. The ulnae were cyclically loaded and subsequently loaded to failure, with ultimate load, number of cycles, and gap formation recorded. Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the standard and extended fixation plates in simple transverse fractures at either 25% or 50% from the proximal most portion of the articular surface of the olecranon. Conclusion: Standard fixation plates are sufficient for the fixation of small transverse fractures, but caution should be utilized particularly with comminution and nontransverse fracture patterns