These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An in vitro biomechanical comparison of a prototype equine metacarpal dynamic compression plate fixation with double dynamic compression plate fixation of osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones.
    Author: Sod GA, Hubert JD, Martin GS, Gill MS.
    Journal: Vet Surg; 2005; 34(6):594-603. PubMed ID: 16343147.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: To compare the monotonic biomechanical properties of a prototype equine third metacarpal dynamic compression plate (EM-DCP) fixation with a double broad dynamic compression plate (DCP) fixation to repair osteotomized equine third metacarpal (MC3) bones. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro biomechanical testing of paired cadaveric equine MC3 with a mid-diaphyseal osteotomy, stabilized by 1 of 2 methods for fracture fixation. POPULATION: Twelve pairs of adult equine cadaveric MC3 bones. METHODS: Twelve pairs of equine MC3 were divided into 3 test groups (4 pairs each) for (1) 4-point bending single cycle to failure testing, (2) 4-point bending cyclic fatigue testing, and (3) torsional testing. The EM-DCP (10-hole, 4.5 mm) was applied to the dorsal surface of one randomly selected bone from each pair. Two DCPs, 1 dorsally (10-hole, 4.5 mm broad) and 1 laterally (9-hole, 4.5 mm broad) were applied to the contralateral bone from each pair. All plates and screws were applied using standard AO/ASIF techniques to MC3 bones that had mid-diaphyseal osteotomies. Mean test variable values for each method were compared using a paired t-test within each group. Significance was set at P<.05. RESULTS: Mean 4-point bending yield load, yield bending moment, bending composite rigidity, failure load and failure bending moment of the EM-DCP fixation were significantly greater (P<.0001) than those of the double broad DCP fixation. Mean cycles to failure in 4-point bending of the EM-DCP fixation was significantly greater (P<.0008) than that of the double broad DCP fixation. Mean yield load, composite rigidity, and failure load in torsion of the EM-DCP fixation were significantly greater (P<.0035) than that of the double broad DCP fixation. CONCLUSION: The EM-DCP provides increased stability in both static overload testing and cyclic fatigue testing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of this in vitro study support the conclusion that the prototype EM-DCP fixation is biomechanically superior to the double broad DCP fixation for the stabilization of osteotomized equine MC3.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]