Skip to main content
padlock icon - secure page this page is secure

Ex Vivo Biomechanical Comparison of the 2.4 mm UniLOCK® Reconstruction Plate Using 2.4 mm Locking Versus Standard Screws for Fixation of Acetabular Osteotomy in Dogs

Buy Article:

$52.00 + tax (Refund Policy)

Objective

To compare the accuracy of reduction and the biomechanical characteristics of canine acetabular osteotomies stabilized with locking versus standard screws in a locking plate. Study Design

Ex vivo biomechanical study. Sample Population

Cadaveric canine hemipelves and corresponding femurs (n=10 paired). Methods

Transverse acetabular osteotomies stabilized with 5-hole 2.4 mm uniLOCK® reconstruction plates using either 2.4 mm locking monocortical or standard bicortical screw fixation (Synthes® Maxillofacial). Fracture reduction was assessed directly (craniocaudal acetabular width measurements and gross observation) and indirectly (impression casts). All constructs were fatigue-tested, followed by acute destructive testing. All outcome measures (mean±SD) were evaluated for significance (P<.05) using paired t-tests. Results

Craniocaudal acetabular diameters before and after fixation were not significantly different (21.9±1.2 and 21.5±1.2 mm; P=.45). No significant differences were observed in acetabular width differences between pre- and postoperative fixation between groups (locking −0.4±0.4 mm; standard −0.4±0.3 mm; P=.76). Grossly, there was no significant difference in the repairs and impression casts did not reveal a significant (P=.75) difference in congruency between the groups. No significant differences were found in fracture gap between groups either dorsally (locking 0.38±0.23 mm versus standard 0.22±0.05 mm; P=.30) or ventrally (locking 0.80±0.79 mm versus standard 0.35±0.13 mm; P=.23), and maximum change in amplitude dorsally (locking 0.96±2.15 mm versus standard 0.92±0.89 mm; P=.96) or ventrally (locking 2.02±2.93 mm versus standard 0.15±0.81 mm; P=.25). There were no significant differences in stiffness (locking 241±46 N/mm versus standard 283±209 N/mm; P=.64) or load to failure (locking 1077±950 N versus standard 811±248 N; P=.49). Conclusion

No significant differences were found between pelves stabilized with locking monocortical screw fixation or standard bicortical screw fixation with respect to joint congruity, displacement of fracture gap after cyclic loading, construct stiffness, or ultimate load to failure. Clinical Relevance

There is no apparent advantage of locking plate fixation over standard plate fixation of 2-piece ex vivo acetabular fractures using the 2.4 mm uniLOCK® reconstruction plate.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Document Type: Research Article

Publication date: December 1, 2008

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
X
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more