Subscribe to RSS
Download PDF
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-11-01-0011
In vitro biomechanical evaluation and comparison of a new prototype locking plate and a limited-contact self compression plate for equine fracture repair
Publication History
Received
25 January 2011
Accepted
24 February 2012
Publication Date:
19 December 2017 (online)
Summary
Objective: To determine if the mechanical properties (strength and stiffness) of a new prototype 4.5 mm broad locking plate (NP-LP) are comparable with those of a traditional 4.5 mm broad limited-contact self compression plate (LC-SCP), and to compare the bending and torsional properties of the NP-LP and LCSCP when used in osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones (MC3).
Methods: The plates alone were tested in four-point bending single cycle to failure. The MC3-plate constructs were created with middiaphyseal osteotomies with a 1 cm gap. Constructs were tested in four-point bending single cycle to failure, four-point bending cyclic fatigue, and torsion single cycle to failure.
Results: There were not any significant differences in bending strength and stiffness found between the two implants. The MC3-NP-LP construct was significantly stiffer than the MC3-LC-SCP in bending. No other biomechanical differences were found in bending, yield load in torsion, or mean composite rigidity. Mean cycles to failure for bending fatigue testing were similar for both constructs.
Clinical significance: The NP-LP was comparable to the LC-SCP in intrinsic, as well as structural properties. The NP-LP construct was more rigid than the LC-SCP construct under four-point bending, and both constructs behaved similarly under four-point bending cyclic fatigue testing and torsion single cycle to failure. The new NP-LP implant fixation is biomechanically comparable to the LC-SCP in a simulated MC3 fracture.
-
References
- 1 Wagner M. General principles for the clinical use of the LCP. Injury 2003; 34 Suppl 2 B31-B42.
- 2 Schelegel U, Perren SM. Surgical aspects of infection involving osteosynthesis implants: implant design and resistance to local infection. Injury 2006; 37 Suppl 2 S67-S73.
- 3 Tong GO. History and evolution of MIPO. In: Tong GO, Bavonratanavech S. editors. AO Manual of Fracture Management, Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis (MIPO). Davos, Switzerland: AO Publishing, Thieme; 2007. pg. 3-7.
- 4 Auer JA. Metacarpal (-tarsal) shaft. In: Fackelman G, Auer JA, Numamaker DM. editors. AO principles of Equine osteosynthesis. Davos, Switzerland: AO Publishing, Thieme; 1999. pg. 194.
- 5 Bischofberger AS, Fürst A, Auer J. et al. Surgical management of complete diaphyseal third metacarpal and metatarsal bone fractures: clinical outcome in 10 mature horses and 11 foals. Equine Vet J 2009; 41: 465-473.
- 6 Florin M, Arzdorf M, Linke B. et al. Assessment of stiffness and strength of 4 different implants available for equine fracture treatment: A study on a 20° oblique long-bone fracture model using a bone substitute. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 231-238.
- 7 Sommer C. Biomechanics and clinical application principles of locking plates. Suomen Ortopedia Ja Traumatologia 2006; 29: 20-24.
- 8 Cronier P, Pietu G. The concept of locking plates. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2010; 96: S17-S36.
- 9 Haerdi-Landerer C, Steiner A, Linke B. et al. Comparison of double dynamic compression plating versus two configurations of an internal veterinary fixation device: Results of in vitro mechanical testing using a bone substitute. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 582-588.
- 10 Aguila AZ, Manos JM, Orlansky AS. In vitro biomechanical comparison of limited contact dynamic compression plate and locking compression plate. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005; 18: 220-226.
- 11 Sod GA, Mitchell CF, Hubert JD. In vitro biomechanical 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.
- 12 Sommer PR, Oldenburg GV, Procter P. LCPTM: Screw Extraction problem. Stryker Osteosynthesis. March 2006 Literature Number: 984002, LOT A1106.
- 13 Bae JH, Oh JK, Oh CW. et al. Technical difficulties of removal of locking screw after locking compression plating. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009; 129: 91-95.
- 14 Standard specification and test method for metallic bone plates, ASTM. F 382-99 (re-approved 2003)el, in 2003 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, American Society for testing and Materials West Conshohocken, PA, ASTM: 2003
- 15 Detora MD, Kraus KH. Mechanical testing of 3. 5mm locking and non-locking bone plates Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008; 21: 318-322.
- 16 Lopez MJ, Wilson DG, Vanderby JR. R. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of an interlocking nail system and dynamic compression plate fixation of ostectomized equine third metacarpal bones. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 333-340.
- 17 Sod GA, Hubert JD, Matin GS. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of a limited-contact dynamic compression plate fixation with a dynamic compression plate fixation of osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 579-586.
- 18 Rybicki EF, Mills EJ, Turner AS. et al. In vivo and analytical studies of forces and moments in equine long bones. J Biomechanics 1977; 10: 701-705.
- 19 Akeson WH, Woo SL, Rutherford L. et al. The effects of rigidity of internal fixation plates on long bone remodeling. A biomechanical and quantitative histological study. Acta Orthop Scand 1976; 47: 241-249.
- 20 Carter DR, Shimaoka EE, Harris WH. et al. Changes in long-bone structural properties during the first 8 weeks of plate implantation. J Orthop Res 1984; 2: 80-89.
- 21 Ruedi TP, Buckley RE, Moran CG. In: AO Principles of Fracture Management. Volume 1: Principles, Second expanded edition. Davos, Switzerland: AO Publishing, Thieme; 2007. pg. 34.
- 22 Lopez MJ, Wilson DG, Vanderby R. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of two interlocking-nail systems for fixation of ostectomized equine third metacarpal bones. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 246-252.
- 23 Radcliffe RM, Lopez MJ, Turner TA. et al. An in vitro biomechanical comparison of interlocking nail constructs and double plating for fixation of diaphyseal femur fractures in immature horses. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 179-190.
- 24 McDuffee LA, Stover SM, Coleman K. Limb loading activity of adult horses confined to box stalls in a equine hospital barn. Am J Vet Res 2000; 3: 234-237.
- 25 Sod GA, Hubert JD, Matin GS. et al. 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. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 594-603.
- 26 Sod GA, Hubert JD, Martin GS. et al. An in vitro evaluation of plate luting using osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones with a limited contact-dynamic compression plate. Vet Surg 2005; 34: 587-593.
- 27 Shorafa WM, Feaster JP, Ott EA. Horse metacarpal bone: age, ash content, cortical area and failure stress interrelationships. J Anim Sci 1979; 49: 979-982.