An in vitro biomechanical comparison of a 5.5 mm locking compression plate fixation with a 4.5 mm locking compression plate fixation of osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones.
Abstract: To compare the monotonic biomechanical properties and fatigue life of a 5.5-mm-broad locking compression plate (5.5 LCP) fixation with a 4.5-mm-broad locking compression plate (4.5 LCP) fixation to repair osteotomized equine 3rd metacarpal (MC3) bones. Methods: In vitro biomechanical testing of paired cadaveric equine MC3 with a middiaphyseal osteotomy, stabilized by 1 of 2 methods for fracture fixation. Methods: Fifteen pairs of adult equine cadaveric MC3 bones. Methods: Fifteen pairs of equine MC3 were divided into 3 test groups (5 pairs each) for (1) 4-point bending single cycle to failure testing, (2) 4-point bending cyclic fatigue testing, and (3) torsional single cycle to failure testing. An 8-hole, 5.5 LCP was applied to the dorsal surface of 1 randomly selected bone from each pair and an 8-hole, 4.5 LCP was applied dorsally to the contralateral bone from each pair using a combination of cortical and locking screws. All plates and screws were applied using standard ASIF techniques. All MC3 bones had middiaphyseal osteotomies. Mean test variable values for each method were compared using a paired t-test within each group with significance set at P<.05. Results: Mean yield load, yield bending moment, composite rigidity, failure load, and failure bending moment, under 4-point bending, single cycle to failure, of the 5.5 LCP fixation were significantly greater than those of the 4.5 LCP fixation. Mean cycles to failure in 4-point bending of the 5.5 LCP fixation (170,535+/-19,166) was significantly greater than that of the 4.5 LCP fixation (129,629+/-14,054). Mean yield load, mean composite rigidity, and mean failure load under torsional testing, single cycle to failure was significantly greater for the broad 5.5 LCP fixation compared with the 4.5 LCP fixation. In single cycle to failure under torsion, the mean+/-SD values for the 5.5 LCP and the 4.5 LCP fixation techniques, respectively, were: yield load, 151.4+/-19.6 and 97.6+/-12.1 N m; composite rigidity, 790.3+/-58.1 and 412.3+/-28.1 N m/rad; and failure load: 162.1+/-20.2 and 117.9+/-14.6 N m. Conclusions: The 5.5 LCP was superior to the 4.5 LCP in resisting static overload forces (palmarodorsal 4-point bending and torsional) and in resisting cyclic fatigue under palmarodorsal 4-point bending. Conclusions: These in vitro study results may provide information to aid in selection of an LCP for repair of equine long bone fractures.
Publication Date: 2010-05-06 PubMed ID: 20459505DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00684.xGoogle Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Comparative Study
- Journal Article
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research focuses on comparing the effectiveness of 5.5-mm and 4.5-mm locking compression plates (LCPs) for fixing fractures in horse metacarpal bones (MC3). The researchers found that the 5.5 LCP was superior in resisting static and fatigue loads compared to the 4.5 LCP, thus providing valuable insights for orthopedic surgery in horses.
Methodology
- The researchers divided fifteen pairs of horse MC3 bones into three groups for different types of testing: 4-point bending single cycle to failure, 4-point bending cyclic fatigue, and torsional single cycle to failure.
- Each bone in a pair was randomly assigned and fitted with either a 5.5 LCP or a 4.5 LCP on the dorsal surface, using a mixture of cortical and locking screws.
- Standard ASIF methods were applied in fitting all plates and screws.
- All MC3 bones were middiaphyseal osteotomies.
- The research team compared the average test variable values for both methods using a paired t-test within each group and set the significance level at P<.05.
Findings
- The 5.5 LCP fixation scored significantly higher than the 4.5 LCP fixation for yield load, yield bending moment, composite rigidity, failure load, and failure bending moment under single cycle to failure.
- The 5.5 LCP fixation’s mean cycles to failure (170,535+/-19,166) was notably greater than that of the 4.5 LCP fixation (129,629+/-14,054).
- Under the torsional single cycle to failure testing, the 5.5 LCP fixation demonstrated greater yield load, composite rigidity, and failure load compared to the 4.5 LCP fixation.
Conclusion
- The study concluded that the 5.5 LCP was superior in resisting both static overload forces and cyclic fatigue under 4-point bending, compared to the 4.5 LCP.
- This in vitro study offers valuable insights which may guide the selection of an LCP for repairing long bone fractures in horses.
Cite This Article
APA
Sod GA, Riggs LM, Mitchell CF, Martin GS, Gill MS.
(2010).
An in vitro biomechanical comparison of a 5.5 mm locking compression plate fixation with a 4.5 mm locking compression plate fixation of osteotomized equine third metacarpal bones.
Vet Surg, 39(5), 581-587.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00684.x Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Equine Health Studies Program, Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA. gsod@vetmed.lsu.edu
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Biomechanical Phenomena
- Bone Plates / veterinary
- Horses / surgery
- In Vitro Techniques
- Metacarpal Bones / surgery
- Osteotomy / veterinary
- Torsion, Mechanical
- Weight-Bearing
Citations
This article has been cited 1 times.- Padron AA, Owen JR, Wayne JS, Aktay SA, Barnes RF. In vitro biomechanical testing of the 3.5 mm LCP in torsion: a comparison of unicortical locking to bicortical nonlocking screws placed nearest the fracture gap. BMC Res Notes 2017 Dec 27;10(1):768.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
