2.4的离体生物力学评估 mm LCP板棒结构与2.7 mm LCP应用于猫胫骨。

IF 1.3 2区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Veterinary Surgery Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-11 DOI:10.1111/vsu.14038
A Gutbrod, F Longo, R Affentranger, S J Ferguson, A Pozzi, S C Knell
{"title":"2.4的离体生物力学评估 mm LCP板棒结构与2.7 mm LCP应用于猫胫骨。","authors":"A Gutbrod, F Longo, R Affentranger, S J Ferguson, A Pozzi, S C Knell","doi":"10.1111/vsu.14038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the stiffness and strength of three plate and rod fixation constructs applied to a feline tibial gap model.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Ex vivo study.</p><p><strong>Sample population: </strong>Thirty-three unpaired tibiae obtained from skeletally mature cats.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The tibiae were randomly divided into three groups. The following implants were then applied to the feline tibiae prior to the creation of a 10 mm diaphyseal gap. Group 1: 2.4 mm locking compression plate (LCP) and 1.0 mm intramedullary pin (IMP). Group 2: 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP. Group 3: 2.7 mm LCP. Subsequently, each specimen was tested for torsion, axial compression, and axial load until construct failure. Student's t-tests were used to compare the torsional and axial stiffness, yield load, and maximum axial force.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group 2 had higher axial stiffness than group 3 (p = .013). Group 1 showed a lower maximum axial force and yield point than groups 2 and 3 (p < .01; p < .05, respectively). There were no among-group differences in torsional stiffness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Constructs with a 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP provided the strongest and most rigid constructs in a feline tibia gap model.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>A plate-rod construct combining a 2.4 mm LCP and a 1.6 mm IMP is appropriate for achieving high implant stiffness and resisting maximum axial force in treatment of tibial fractures in cats.</p>","PeriodicalId":23667,"journal":{"name":"Veterinary Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation of 2.4 mm LCP plate rod constructs versus 2.7 mm LCP applied to the feline tibia.\",\"authors\":\"A Gutbrod, F Longo, R Affentranger, S J Ferguson, A Pozzi, S C Knell\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/vsu.14038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the stiffness and strength of three plate and rod fixation constructs applied to a feline tibial gap model.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Ex vivo study.</p><p><strong>Sample population: </strong>Thirty-three unpaired tibiae obtained from skeletally mature cats.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The tibiae were randomly divided into three groups. The following implants were then applied to the feline tibiae prior to the creation of a 10 mm diaphyseal gap. Group 1: 2.4 mm locking compression plate (LCP) and 1.0 mm intramedullary pin (IMP). Group 2: 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP. Group 3: 2.7 mm LCP. Subsequently, each specimen was tested for torsion, axial compression, and axial load until construct failure. Student's t-tests were used to compare the torsional and axial stiffness, yield load, and maximum axial force.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Group 2 had higher axial stiffness than group 3 (p = .013). Group 1 showed a lower maximum axial force and yield point than groups 2 and 3 (p < .01; p < .05, respectively). There were no among-group differences in torsional stiffness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Constructs with a 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP provided the strongest and most rigid constructs in a feline tibia gap model.</p><p><strong>Clinical significance: </strong>A plate-rod construct combining a 2.4 mm LCP and a 1.6 mm IMP is appropriate for achieving high implant stiffness and resisting maximum axial force in treatment of tibial fractures in cats.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23667,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Veterinary Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Veterinary Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/10/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Veterinary Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vsu.14038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较应用于猫胫骨间隙模型的三种板棒固定结构的刚度和强度。研究设计:离体研究。样本群体:33个未配对的胫骨,取自骨骼成熟的猫。方法:将胫骨随机分为三组。在产生10 mm骨干间隙。第1组:2.4 mm锁定压板(LCP)和1.0 mm髓内钉(IMP)。第2组:2.4 mm LCP和1.6 mm IMP.第3组:2.7 mm LCP。随后,对每个试样进行扭转、轴向压缩和轴向载荷测试,直到结构失效。学生t检验用于比较扭转和轴向刚度、屈服载荷和最大轴向力。结果:第2组的轴向刚度高于第3组(p = .013)。第1组的最大轴向力和屈服点低于第2组和第3组(p 结论:构建2.4 mm LCP和1.6 mm IMP在猫胫骨间隙模型中提供了最强和最刚性的结构。临床意义:一种结合2.4 mm LCP和1.6 mm IMP适用于在治疗猫胫骨骨折时实现高植入物刚度和抵抗最大轴向力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ex vivo biomechanical evaluation of 2.4 mm LCP plate rod constructs versus 2.7 mm LCP applied to the feline tibia.

Objective: To compare the stiffness and strength of three plate and rod fixation constructs applied to a feline tibial gap model.

Study design: Ex vivo study.

Sample population: Thirty-three unpaired tibiae obtained from skeletally mature cats.

Methods: The tibiae were randomly divided into three groups. The following implants were then applied to the feline tibiae prior to the creation of a 10 mm diaphyseal gap. Group 1: 2.4 mm locking compression plate (LCP) and 1.0 mm intramedullary pin (IMP). Group 2: 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP. Group 3: 2.7 mm LCP. Subsequently, each specimen was tested for torsion, axial compression, and axial load until construct failure. Student's t-tests were used to compare the torsional and axial stiffness, yield load, and maximum axial force.

Results: Group 2 had higher axial stiffness than group 3 (p = .013). Group 1 showed a lower maximum axial force and yield point than groups 2 and 3 (p < .01; p < .05, respectively). There were no among-group differences in torsional stiffness.

Conclusion: Constructs with a 2.4 mm LCP and 1.6 mm IMP provided the strongest and most rigid constructs in a feline tibia gap model.

Clinical significance: A plate-rod construct combining a 2.4 mm LCP and a 1.6 mm IMP is appropriate for achieving high implant stiffness and resisting maximum axial force in treatment of tibial fractures in cats.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Veterinary Surgery
Veterinary Surgery 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
22.20%
发文量
162
审稿时长
8-16 weeks
期刊介绍: Veterinary Surgery, the official publication of the American College of Veterinary Surgeons and European College of Veterinary Surgeons, is a source of up-to-date coverage of surgical and anesthetic management of animals, addressing significant problems in veterinary surgery with relevant case histories and observations. It contains original, peer-reviewed articles that cover developments in veterinary surgery, and presents the most current review of the field, with timely articles on surgical techniques, diagnostic aims, care of infections, and advances in knowledge of metabolism as it affects the surgical patient. The journal places new developments in perspective, encompassing new concepts and peer commentary to help better understand and evaluate the surgical patient.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信