234 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21464741)
1. Biomechanical comparison of fixation techniques in midshaft clavicular fractures.
Demirhan M; Bilsel K; Atalar AC; Bozdag E; Sunbuloglu E; Kale A
J Orthop Trauma; 2011 May; 25(5):272-8. PubMed ID: 21464741
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Locking plates have increased torsional stiffness compared to standard plates in a segmental defect model of clavicle fracture.
Will R; Englund R; Lubahn J; Cooney TE
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2011 Jun; 131(6):841-7. PubMed ID: 21188395
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Unicortical versus bicortical locked plate fixation in midshaft clavicle fractures.
Bravman JT; Taylor ML; Baldini T; Vidal AF
Orthopedics; 2015 May; 38(5):e411-6. PubMed ID: 25970369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Biomechanical comparison of proximal locking plates and blade plates for the treatment of comminuted subtrochanteric femoral fractures.
Floyd JC; O'Toole RV; Stall A; Forward DP; Nabili M; Shillingburg D; Hsieh A; Nascone JW
J Orthop Trauma; 2009 Oct; 23(9):628-33. PubMed ID: 19897983
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Biomechanical comparison of contemporary clavicle fixation devices.
Renfree T; Conrad B; Wright T
J Hand Surg Am; 2010 Apr; 35(4):639-44. PubMed ID: 20138445
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Can DCP and LCP plates generate more compression? The effect of multiple eccentrically placed screws and their drill positioning guides.
Ya'ish FM; Nanu AM; Cross AT
Injury; 2011 Oct; 42(10):1095-100. PubMed ID: 21450288
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Biomechanical comparison of 4 different lateral plate constructs for distal fibula fractures.
Eckel TT; Glisson RR; Anand P; Parekh SG
Foot Ankle Int; 2013 Nov; 34(11):1588-95. PubMed ID: 23818460
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Two reconstruction plates provide superior stability of displaced midshaft clavicle fractures in comparison to single plating - A biomechanical study.
Yanev P; Zderic I; Pukalski Y; Enchev D; Rashkov M; Varga P; Gehweiler D; Richards G; Gueorguiev B; Baltov A
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2020 Dec; 80():105199. PubMed ID: 33129563
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. In vitro biomechanical comparison of limited contat dynamic compression plate and locking compression plate.
Aguila AZ; Manos JM; Orlansky AS; Todhunter RJ; Trotter EJ; Van der Meulen MC
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol; 2005; 18(4):220-6. PubMed ID: 16594390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A surgical technique for minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis of clavicular midshaft fractures.
Sohn HS; Kim BY; Shin SJ
J Orthop Trauma; 2013 Apr; 27(4):e92-6. PubMed ID: 22773015
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Biomechanical analysis of fixation of middle third fractures of the clavicle.
Drosdowech DS; Manwell SE; Ferreira LM; Goel DP; Faber KJ; Johnson JA
J Orthop Trauma; 2011 Jan; 25(1):39-43. PubMed ID: 21085028
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Biomechanical analysis of locked and non-locked plate fixation of the clavicle.
Little KJ; Riches PE; Fazzi UG
Injury; 2012 Jun; 43(6):921-5. PubMed ID: 22405337
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Biomechanical Comparison of Superior Versus Anterior Plate Position for Fixation of Distal Clavicular Fractures: A New Model.
Wilkerson J; Paryavi E; Kim H; Murthi A; Pensy RA
J Orthop Trauma; 2017 Jan; 31(1):e13-e17. PubMed ID: 27661732
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. A mechanical comparison of the locking compression plate (LCP) and the low contact-dynamic compression plate (DCP) in an osteoporotic bone model.
Snow M; Thompson G; Turner PG
J Orthop Trauma; 2008 Feb; 22(2):121-5. PubMed ID: 18349780
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Biomechanical comparison of the Locking Compression superior anterior clavicle plate with seven and ten hole reconstruction plates in midshaft clavicle fracture stabilisation.
Eden L; Doht S; Frey SP; Ziegler D; Stoyhe J; Fehske K; Blunk T; Meffert RH
Int Orthop; 2012 Dec; 36(12):2537-43. PubMed ID: 23073924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. A biomechanical comparison of locked plate fixation with percutaneous insertion capability versus the angled blade plate in a subtrochanteric fracture gap model.
Crist BD; Khalafi A; Hazelwood SJ; Lee MA
J Orthop Trauma; 2009 Oct; 23(9):622-7. PubMed ID: 19897982
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Biomechanical comparison of double-row locking plates versus single- and double-row non-locking plates in a comminuted metacarpal fracture model.
Gajendran VK; Szabo RM; Myo GK; Curtiss SB
J Hand Surg Am; 2009 Dec; 34(10):1851-8. PubMed ID: 19897325
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Analysis of the mechanical properties of locking plates with and without screw hole inserts.
Eichinger JK; Herzog JP; Arrington ED
Orthopedics; 2011 Jan; 34(1):19. PubMed ID: 21210620
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. A biomechanical comparison of superior and anterior positioning of precontoured plates for midshaft clavicle fractures.
Toogood P; Coughlin D; Rodriguez D; Lotz J; Feeley B
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ); 2014 Oct; 43(10):E226-31. PubMed ID: 25303449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Biomechanical testing of the locking compression plate: when does the distance between bone and implant significantly reduce construct stability?
Ahmad M; Nanda R; Bajwa AS; Candal-Couto J; Green S; Hui AC
Injury; 2007 Mar; 38(3):358-64. PubMed ID: 17296199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
