Analyze Diet
Veterinary surgery : VS2012; 41(8); 918-923; doi: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2012.01061.x

In vitro mechanical testing of an alternate laryngoplasty system (ALPS) for horses.

Abstract: Mechanical evaluation of a novel alternate laryngoplasty system (ALPS). Methods: Experimental. Methods: Cadaveric horse larynges (n = 10). Methods: Arytenoid and cricoid cartilages were embedded for testing. A novel laryngoplasty system consisting of a metallic anchor, 2 stands of #2 suture material, and a metallic button were evaluated. A traditional laryngoplasty using a single strand of #5 Ethibond was evaluated in parallel. Constructs were evaluated in cyclic testing oscillating from 30 to 50 N for 3600 cycles. Constructs subsequently underwent a single cycle to failure. Distraction during cyclic testing was recorded. Load at failure and stiffness were calculated from single-cycle failure testing. Results: There was no difference in mean arytenoid single-cycle load-to-failure for the Ethibond (206.9 ± 13.1 N) constructs compared with ALPS (220.6 ±17.1 N) constructs (P = .486). In the cricoid under single-cycle testing, the ALPS (236.0 ± 23.4 N) constructs were significantly stronger than the Ethibond (161.5 ± 12.2 N) constructs (P = .013). The combined distraction was significantly greater for Ethibond (6.29 ± 1.24 mm) constructs compared to the ALPS (3.43 ± 0.28 mm) constructs (P = .033). Conclusions: The ALPS construct was stiffer and at least as strong as the traditional laryngoplasty construct in single cycle failure in both the arytenoid and cricoid cartilages. Combined distraction was significantly reduced using the ALPS compared to the traditional laryngoplasty in vitro under cyclic testing.
Publication Date: 2012-12-04 PubMed ID: 23198920DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950X.2012.01061.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.
  • 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.

The research is a mechanical evaluation of a new alternate laryngoplasty system (ALPS) in comparison to traditional laryngoplasty techniques using cadaveric horse larynges. The results suggest that ALPS is stiffer and as strong as the traditional technique, with a significantly reduced distraction rate during cyclic testing.

Experiment Overview

  • The experiment was carried out on cadaveric horse larynges (10 in number).
  • Two types of laryngoplasty systems were tested: a new alternate laryngoplasty system (ALPS), and a traditional laryngoplasty technique using a single strand of #5 Ethibond.
  • The ALPS consisted of a metallic anchor, two stands of #2 suture material, and a metallic button.
  • The arytenoid and cricoid cartilages were embedded for testing.
  • The laryngoplasty constructs were evaluated using an oscillating cyclic test from 30 to 50 Newtons for 3600 cycles.
  • The constructs then underwent a single cycle to failure test.

Results of the Testing

  • No significant difference was observed in the mean arytenoid single-cycle load-to-failure for the Ethibond (206.9 ± 13.1 N) constructs and the ALPS (220.6 ±17.1 N) constructs.
  • In the single-cycle testing on the cricoid, the ALPS constructs (236.0 ± 23.4 N) were notably stronger than the Ethibond constructs (161.5 ± 12.2 N).
  • Furthermore, the overall distraction was significantly greater for the Ethibond constructs (6.29 ± 1.24 mm) as opposed to the ALPS constructs (3.43 ± 0.28 mm).

Conclusions

  • The ALPS construct showed better mechanical performance. It was not only stiffer but also equally strong as the traditional laryngoplasty construct in single cycle failure in both the arytenoid and cricoid cartilages.
  • The ALPS constructs also significantly reduced combined distraction compared to traditional laryngoplasty under cyclic testing conditions.

These findings suggest that ALPS may offer advantages in laryngoplasty procedures for horses in terms of strength, stiffness, and reduced distraction. Further research is needed to evaluate the clinical relevance of these findings.

Cite This Article

APA
Ahern BJ, Boston RC, Parente EJ. (2012). In vitro mechanical testing of an alternate laryngoplasty system (ALPS) for horses. Vet Surg, 41(8), 918-923. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-950X.2012.01061.x

Publication

ISSN: 1532-950X
NlmUniqueID: 8113214
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 41
Issue: 8
Pages: 918-923

Researcher Affiliations

Ahern, Benjamin J
  • Department of Clinical Studies, School of Veterinary Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, New Bolton Center, Kennett Square, PA, USA. ahernvet@gmail.com
Boston, Raymond C
    Parente, Eric J

      MeSH Terms

      • Animals
      • Arytenoid Cartilage / surgery
      • Biomechanical Phenomena
      • Cadaver
      • Cricoid Cartilage / surgery
      • Horse Diseases / surgery
      • Horses
      • Laryngeal Diseases / surgery
      • Laryngeal Diseases / veterinary
      • Laryngoplasty / methods
      • Laryngoplasty / veterinary
      • Sutures / veterinary

      Citations

      This article has been cited 3 times.
      1. Byrne CA, Hotchkiss JW, Barakzai SZ. Variations in the application of equine prosthetic laryngoplasty: A survey of 128 equine surgeons. Vet Surg 2023 Feb;52(2):209-220.
        doi: 10.1111/vsu.13913pubmed: 36420588google scholar: lookup
      2. Grzeskowiak RM, Schumacher J, Mulon PY, Steiner RC, Cassone L, Anderson DE. Ex-vivo Mechanical Testing of Novel Laryngeal Clamps Used for Laryngeal Advancement Constructs. Front Vet Sci 2020;7:139.
        doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00139pubmed: 32226795google scholar: lookup
      3. Ysebaert MP, Johnson J, Marie U, Campos A, Verchrerin A, Ducharme NG, Rossignol F, Luedke LK. Biomechanical testing of three constructs for prosthetic laryngoplasty in horses demonstrates advantages of differing metallic implants in the arytenoid cartilage. Vet Surg 2026 Jan;55(1):69-77.
        doi: 10.1111/vsu.14328pubmed: 40785216google scholar: lookup