In vitro comparison of metaphyseal and diaphyseal placement of centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins in the equine third metacarpal bone.
Abstract: To evaluate in vitro holding power and associated microstructural and thermal damage from placement of positive-profile transfixation pins in the diaphysis and metaphysis of the equine third metacarpal bone. Methods: Third metacarpal bones from 30 pairs of adult equine cadavers. Methods: Centrally threaded positive-profile transfixation pins were placed in the diaphysis of 1 metacarpal bone and the metaphysis of the opposite metacarpal bone of 15 pairs of bones. Tensile force at failure for axial extraction was measured with a materials testing system. An additional 15 pairs of metacarpal bones were tested similarly following cyclic loading. Microstructural damage was evaluated via scanning electron microscopy in another 6 pairs of metacarpal bones, 2 pairs in each of the following 3 groups: metacarpal bones with tapped holes and without transfixation pin placement, metacarpal bones following transfixation pin placement, and metacarpal bones following transfixation pin placement and cyclic loading. Temperature of the hardware was measured with a surface thermocouple in 12 additional metacarpal bones warmed to 38 C. Results: The diaphysis provided significantly greater resistance to axial extraction than the metaphysis. There were no significant temperature differences between diaphyseal and metaphyseal placement. Microstructural damage was limited to occasional microfractures seen only in cortical bone of diaphyseal and metaphyseal locations. Microfractures originated during drilling and tapping but did not worsen following transfixation pin placement or cyclic loading. Conclusions: Centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins have greater resistance to axial extraction in the diaphysis than in the metaphysis of equine third metacarpal bone in vitro. This information may be used to create more stable external skeletal fixation in horses with fractures.
Publication Date: 2000-10-20 PubMed ID: 11039566DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.2000.61.1304Google 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
- Evaluation Study
- Journal Article
- Research Support
- Non-U.S. Gov't
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.
This research paper discusses an in-depth study conducted to compare the stability and possible structural damage resulting from placing central threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins either in the diaphysis or metaphysis of the horse’s third metacarpal bone.
Methodology
- The researchers utilized the third metacarpal bones from 30 pairs of adult horse cadavers.
- The transfixation pins were placed in the diaphysis of one bone, and the metaphysis of the opposite bone for 15 pairs of bones.
- The strength of each setup was then measured by determining the amount of tensile force each could withstand before breaking using a materials testing system.
- An additional set of 15 bone pairs were subjected to cyclic loading before testing.
- A further six pairs of bones were examined with scanning electron microscopy for microstructural damage under three different conditions: with tapped holes but without pin placements, after pin placements, and following pin placements and cyclic loading.
- The temperature of the hardware in 12 other metacarpal bones warmed to 38 C was also measured using a surface thermocouple.
Results
- The research found that the diaphysis provided a significantly higher resistance to axial extraction compared to the metaphysis.
- No significant temperature differences were observed between diaphyseal and metaphyseal placements.
- Microstructural damage was minimal, and only occasional microfractures were noticed in the cortical bone at both diaphyseal and metaphyseal locations.
- These microfractures occurred during the drilling and tapping process but did not increase following the placement of the transfixation pin or after cyclic loading.
Conclusion
- A conclusion was drawn from the study’s findings that centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins have a higher resistance to axial extraction in the diaphysis than in the metaphysis of equine third metacarpal bone in vitro.
- This discovery could potentially lead to a more stable external skeletal fixation in horses with fractures.
Cite This Article
APA
McClure SR, Hillberry BM, Fisher KE.
(2000).
In vitro comparison of metaphyseal and diaphyseal placement of centrally threaded, positive-profile transfixation pins in the equine third metacarpal bone.
Am J Vet Res, 61(10), 1304-1308.
https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.2000.61.1304 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906-1248, USA.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Diaphyses
- External Fixators / veterinary
- Fractures, Bone / pathology
- Fractures, Bone / therapy
- Fractures, Bone / veterinary
- Horse Diseases / pathology
- Horse Diseases / therapy
- Horses
- In Vitro Techniques
- Metacarpus / ultrastructure
- Microscopy, Electron / veterinary
- Stress, Mechanical
Citations
This article has been cited 0 times.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