Download PDF
Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care 2006; 14(1): 60-63
DOI: 10.1055/s-2005-872554
Original Article

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

A Standard Closed Fracture in the Goat Tibia

T. E. Otto1 , P. Patka1 , H. J. T. M. Haarman1
  • 1Department of Trauma Surgery, VU Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
02 March 2006 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to develop a large animal closed tibial fracture model for basic and applied research of fracture healing. A newly designed hydraulic fracture device was used to produce standard closed tibial fractures in 9 living anaesthetised pigmy goats. This device was first tested on 38 goat cadaver tibia. All fractures were located in the middle third of the tibia without compromising the soft tissue at the fracture site and at the pressure support sites. The fractures were stabilised using an external cast for 8 weeks. In one goat a delayed skin perforation caused by insufficiently immobilised bone fragments occurred. All other fractures healed without complications. The mean angle of the fracture line with the axis of the tibia on lateral view was 78 ± 12 degrees (SD). The hydraulic fracture device can be used to produce a standard closed fracture in goat, sheep as well as dog tibia without compromising the soft tissue. This goat tibial fracture model is considered to be well suited for the study of closed fracture healing processes, as well as for the evaluation of various osteosynthesis materials and bone healing enhancing substrates.

Key words

long bones - large animal model - fracture healing

References

  • 1 Ashurst D E, Hogg J, Perren S M. A method for making reproducible experimental fractures of the rabbit tibia.  Injury. 1986;  14 236-242
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bak B, Andreassen T T. Reduced energy absorption of healed fracture in the rat.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1988;  59 548-551
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Blokhuis T J, den Boer F C, Bramer J AM, Jenner J MGT, Bakker F C, Patka P, Haarman H JTM. Biomechanical and histological aspects of fracture healing, stimulated with osteogenic protein-1.  Biomaterials. 2001;  22 725-730
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bonnarens F, Einhorn T A. Production of a standard closed fracture in laboratory animal bone.  J Orthop Res. 1984;  2 97-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Burstein A H, Frenkel V H. A standard test for laboratory animal bone.  J Biomech. 1971;  4 155-158
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Curtis M J, Brown P R, Dick J D, Jinnah R H. Contaminated fractures of the tibia: a comparison of treatment modalities in an animal model.  J Orthop Res. 1995;  13 286-295
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ekeland A, Engesæter L B, Langeland N. Mechanical properties of fractured and intact rat femora evaluated by bending, torsional and tensile tests.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1981;  52 605-613
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Elst M, Dijkema A RA, Klein C PAT, van Egmond C, Patka P, Haarman H JTM. Tissue reaction on PLLA versus stainless steel interlocking nails for fracture fixation; an animal study.  Biomaterials. 1995;  16 103-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Grundnes O, Reikerås O. The role of hematoma and periosteal sealing for fracture healing in rats.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1993;  64 47-49
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Greiff J. A method for the production of an undisplaced reproducible tibial fracture in the rat.  Injury. 1978;  9 278-281
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hasegawa Y, Sakano S, Iwase T, Warashina H. The long-term behaviour of poly-L-lactide screws in a minipig fracture model: Preliminary report.  J Biomed Mater Res Applied Biomaterials. 2002;  63 679-685
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Hulth A. Current concepts of fracture healing.  Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1989;  249 265-284
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Jackson R W, Reed C A, Israel J A, Abou-Keer F K, Garside H. Production of a standard experimental fracture.  Can J Surg. 1970;  13 415-420
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Macdonald W, Skirving A P, Scull E R. A device for producing experimental fractures.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1988;  59 542-544
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 McKibbin B. The biology of fracture healing in long bones.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1978;  60 150-162
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Müller M E. CCF Comprehensive Classification of Fractures. Pamphlet I and II. M. E. Müller Foundation, Bern 1994
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Müller-Farber J, Rehn J. Morphologic aspects of bone healing after third-degree open fractures: An experimental study.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1983;  101 201-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Nunamaker D M. Experimental models of fracture repair.  Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1998;  355 (Suppl) S56-S65
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Otto T E, Patka P, Haarman H JTM. Closed fracture healing: a rat model.  Eur Surg Res. 1995;  27 277-284
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Park S-H, O'Connor K, Sung R, McKellop H, Sarmiento A. Comparison of healing in open osteotomy model and closed fracture model.  J Orthop Trauma. 1999;  13 114-120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Welch R D. et al . Effect of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 on fracture healing in a goat tibial fracture model.  J Bone Miner Res. 1998;  13 1483-1490
    PubMedGoogle Scholar

T. E. OttoM. D. 

Department of Trauma Surgery · VU University Medical Center

PO Box 70 57

1007 MB Amsterdam

The Netherlands

Phone: +31/20/4 44 02 68

Fax: +31/20/4 44 02 74

Email: pam.vleeuwen@vumc.nl

      >