Single cycle to failure in bending of three standard and five locking plates and plate constructs

被引:50
作者
Blake, C. A. [1 ]
Boudrieau, R. J. [1 ]
Torrance, B. S. [1 ]
Tacvorian, E. K. [2 ]
Cabassu, J. B. [1 ]
Gaudette, G. R. [2 ]
Kowaleski, M. P. [1 ]
机构
[1] Tufts Univ, Cummings Sch Vet Med, Dept Clin Sci, North Grafton, MA 01536 USA
[2] Worcester Polytech Inst, Worcester, MA 01609 USA
关键词
Biomechanics; bone plate; four-point bending; in vitro; DYNAMIC COMPRESSION PLATE; INTERNAL-FIXATION; BONE PLATES; GAP MODEL; IN-VIVO; LC-DCP; STABILITY; DOGS; STABILIZATION; FRACTURES;
D O I
10.3415/VCOT-11-04-0061
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
Objective: To evaluate the biomechanical properties of standard and locking plates in bending. We hypothesised that titanium (Ti) constructs would have the greatest deformation and that String of Pearl (SOP) constructs would have the greatest strength and stiffness, and would behave differently compared to plates alone. Methods: Dynamic compression plates (DCP), stainless steel (SS) limited contact (LC)-DCP (R), Ti LC-DCP, locking compression plates (LCP), 10 mm and 11 mm advanced locking plate system (ALPS 10 / 11), SOP and Fixin plates were evaluated individually and as constructs applied to a validated bone model simulating a bridging osteosynthesis. Bending stiffness and strength were compared using one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey, and unpaired t-test (p <0.05). Results: The SOP plates had significantly greater stiffness than all other plates; Ti LC-DCP,ALPS 10 and Fixin plates had significantly lower stiffness than all other plates. The SOP constructs had the highest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only the Ti LC-DCP, ALPS 10 and Fixin constructs. The ALPS 10 constructs had the lowest mean bending stiffness, and strength that was significantly different from only ALPS 11 and SOP constructs. Comparison of bending structural stiffness of plates versus constructs showed a significant difference in all plate pairs except for the DCP and ALPS 10. Clinical relevance: Due to differing plate construct properties inherent to these diverse implant systems, identical approaches to fracture management and plate application cannot be applied.
引用
收藏
页码:408 / 417
页数:10
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
Acker M, 2010, P 19 ANN SCI M EUR C, P150
[2]  
Aguila AZ, 2005, VET COMP ORTHOPAED, V18, P220
[3]   Biomechanical testing of the locking compression plate: When does the distance between bone and implant significantly reduce construct stability? [J].
Ahmad, M. ;
Nanda, R. ;
Bajwa, A. S. ;
Candal-Couto, J. ;
Green, S. ;
Hui, A. C. .
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2007, 38 (03) :358-364
[4]   An in vitro comparison of a 2.7/3.5 mm hybrid plate alone and combined with crossed K-wires for canine pancarpal arthrodesis [J].
Arnott, J. L. ;
Bailey, R. ;
Shields, A. ;
Bennett, D. .
VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2008, 21 (04) :307-311
[5]  
ASTM, 2003, 2003 ANN BOOK ASTM S
[6]   Mechanical analysis of the bone to plate interface of the LC-DCP and of the PC-FIX on human femora [J].
Borgeaud, M ;
Cordey, J ;
Leyvraz, PF ;
Perren, SM .
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2000, 31 :29-36
[7]  
Boudrieau RJ., 2009, P 2009 ACVS VET S OC, P482
[8]   Single cycle to failure in torsion of three standard and five locking plate constructs [J].
Cabassu, J. B. ;
Kowaleski, M. P. ;
Shorinko, J. K. ;
Blake, C. A. ;
Gaudette, G. R. ;
Boudrieau, R. J. .
VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2011, 24 (06) :418-425
[9]   Mechanical testing of 3.5 mm locking and non-locking bone plates [J].
DeTora, M. ;
Kraus, K. .
VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2008, 21 (04) :318-322
[10]   A biomechanical comparison of 3.5 locking compression plate fixation to 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate fixation in a canine cadaveric distal humeral metaphyseal gap model [J].
Filipowicz, D. ;
Lanz, O. ;
McLaughlin, R. ;
Elder, S. ;
Werre, S. .
VETERINARY AND COMPARATIVE ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2009, 22 (04) :270-277