PDF herunterladen
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2010; 23(02): 149
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-09-10-0105
Letters to the Editor
Schattauer GmbH

Comparison of 3.5 locking compression plate fixation to 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate fixation

Hans van der Zee
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Received: 11. Oktober 2009

Accepted: 01. November 2009

Publikationsdatum:
19. Dezember 2017 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

 

 

  • References

  • 1 Filipowicz D, Lanz O, McLaughlin R. et al. A bio-mechanical 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. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22: 270-277.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bartels K.. Nonunion. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1987; 17: 799-809.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Wagner. General principles for the clinical use of LCP. Injury 2003; 34 (Suppl. 02) Sup 31-42.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Burnstein AH, Wright TM.. Fundamentals of Orthopaedic Biomechanics. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1994: 110-112.
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Aguila AZ, Manos JM, Orlansky AS. et al. In vitro biomechanical comparison of limited contact dynamic compression plate and locking compression plate. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18: 220-226.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Gardner MJ, Brophy RH, Campbell D.. The mechanical behavior of locking compression plates compared with dynamic compression plates in a cadaver radius model. J Orthop Trauma 2005; 19: 597-603.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Fulkerson E, Kenneth AE, Kubiak EN. et al. Fixation of diaphyseal fractures with a segmental defect: A biomechanical comparison of locked and conventional plating techniques. J Trauma 2006; 60: 830-835.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Korner J, Diederichs G, Arzdorf M. et al. A bio-mechanical evaluation of methods of distal humerus fracture fixation using locking compression plates versus conventional reconstruction plates. J Orthop Trauma 2004; 18: 286-293.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 de Tora M, Kraus K.. Mechanical testing of 3.5 mm locking and non-locking bone plates. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 318-322.
    Artikel in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Sod GA, Mitchell CF, Hubert JD. et al. In vitro bio-mechanical comparison of locking compression plate fixation and limited-contact dynamic compression plate fixation of osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones. Vet Surg 2008; 37: 283-288.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Stoffel K, Dieter U, Stachowiak G.. Biomechanical testing of the LCP –how can stability in locked internal fixators be controlled?. Injury 2003; 34 (Suppl. 02) Sup 11-19.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar