Analyze Diet
Veterinary and comparative orthopaedics and traumatology : V.C.O.T2023; 36(4); 184-192; doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1761244

Minimally Invasive Arthrodesis of the Equine Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: A Biomechanical Comparison of Three 5.5-mm Cortical Screws Inserted in Lag Fashion and Two 7.0-mm Headless Cannulated Dual-Pitch Compression Screws.

Abstract:  The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical properties of two minimally invasive arthrodesis techniques of the equine proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint (three transarticular 5.5-mm cortical screws [AO-3TLS] vs. two transarticular 7.0-mm headless cannulated multi-use compression screws [MUC-2TS]) in dynamic non-destructive testing and compression testing to failure. Methods:  The experimental study included six pairs of cadaveric adult equine forelimbs; one limb from each horse was randomly assigned to one of the treatments, and the contralateral limb was submitted to the remaining treatment. The dynamic test was performed alternating non-destructive compression tests at a displacement rate of 5 mm/min up to 5,000 N and sinusoidal compressive cyclic tests at 6 Hz, using a 3,600-N amplitude for 8,550 cycles. Construct stiffness and maximum sagittal plane rotation about the PIP joint markers were determined during the dynamic test. After the dynamic test reached 136,800 cycles, the monotonic compressive test until failure was performed on each construct: load, displacement and sagittal plane rotation about the PIP joint marker at failure were analysed. Results:  The evaluated biomechanical properties showed no statistical difference between the AO-3TLS and MUC-2TS treatment groups in any of the ramps of the dynamic non-destructive test and in the compression loading until failure test. Conclusions:  The MUC-2TS treatment produced biomechanical properties equivalent to the AO-3TLS treatment for PIP joint arthrodesis.
Publication Date: 2023-02-09 PubMed ID: 36758617DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-1761244Google 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.
  • Randomized Controlled Trial
  • Veterinary
  • 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.

This study investigated the structural differences between two less invasive surgical techniques used in the fusion of the horse’s proximal interphalangeal joint, evaluating their respective mechanical properties through non-destructive and compression testing until the point of failure.

Methods

  • The study involved six pairs of cadaveric adult horse forelimbs. Each limb from each pair was randomly assigned one of two treatment methods, while its counterpart underwent the remaining procedure.
  • Three 5.5-mm cortical screws (known as AO-3TLS), and two 7.0-mm headless cannulated multi-use compression screws (MUC-2TS), both transarticular, were used for the arthrodesis.
  • The dynamic test was performed through alternating non-destructive compression tests at a displacement rate of 5 mm/min up to a load of 5,000 N. There were also sinusoidal compressive cyclic tests carried out at 6 Hz, making use of a 3,600-N amplitude lasting 8,550 cycles.
  • The study measured construct stiffness and maximum sagittal plane rotation around the PIP joint markers during the dynamic test.
  • After reaching 136,800 cycles in the dynamic test, a compressive test until failure was performed on each construct. The load, displacement, and rotation of each were analysed.

Results

  • Following the dynamic non-destructive tests and the compression loading test until failure, the biomechanical properties of both the AO-3TLS and MUC-2TS treatments showed no statistical differences.

Conclusion

  • This experiment concluded that the MUC-2TS treatment demonstrated equivalent biomechanical properties to the AO-3TLS treatment for PIP joint fusion, suggesting both techniques can be employed with similar expected outcomes regarding joint stability and post-operative healing.

Cite This Article

APA
Rumpel AS, De Carvalho AL, Vassoler JM, Schmidt ML, Mertz CC, Rozo CAC, Campos JK, Alievi MM. (2023). Minimally Invasive Arthrodesis of the Equine Proximal Interphalangeal Joint: A Biomechanical Comparison of Three 5.5-mm Cortical Screws Inserted in Lag Fashion and Two 7.0-mm Headless Cannulated Dual-Pitch Compression Screws. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol, 36(4), 184-192. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0043-1761244

Publication

ISSN: 2567-6911
NlmUniqueID: 8906319
Country: Germany
Language: English
Volume: 36
Issue: 4
Pages: 184-192

Researcher Affiliations

Rumpel, Aires Santana
  • Department of Animal Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
De Carvalho, Anderson Luiz
  • Department of Animal Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Vassoler, Jakson Manfredini
  • Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Schmidt, Matheus Lothar
  • Post-Graduation Program in Mining, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Mertz, Cleiton Costa
  • Post-Graduation Program in Mining, Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Rozo, Cesar Augusto Camacho
  • Department of Animal Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Campos, Joanna Kulczynski
  • Department of Animal Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.
Alievi, Marcelo Meller
  • Department of Animal Medicine, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

MeSH Terms

  • Horses / surgery
  • Animals
  • Toe Joint / surgery
  • Bone Screws / veterinary
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Joints
  • Arthrodesis / veterinary
  • Arthrodesis / methods

Conflict of Interest Statement

None declared.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.