Advertisement
Advertisement

A biomechanical comparison of 3.5 locking compression plate fixation to 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate fixation in a canine cadaveric distal humeral metaphyseal gap model

Journal: Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology (VCOT)
ISSN: 0932-0814
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-08-05-0042
Issue: 2009: Issue 4 2009
Pages: 270-277

A biomechanical comparison of 3.5 locking compression plate fixation to 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate fixation in a canine cadaveric distal humeral metaphyseal gap model

D. Filipowicz (1), O. Lanz (2), R. McLaughlin (3), S. Elder (4), S. Werre (4)

(1) Department of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, Virginia Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia, USA; (2) Department of Biomedical Sciences & Pathobiology, Virginia Maryland Regional College of Veterinary Medicine, Virginia, USA; (3) Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Mississippi State University, Mississippi, USA; (4) Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Mississippi State University, Mississippi, USA

Keywords

LCP, LC-DCP, Fracture model, axial compression, cyclic torsion

Summary

3.5 locking compression plate (LCP) fixation was compared to 3.5 limited contact dynamic compression plate (LC-DCP) fixation in a canine cadaveric, distal humeral metaphyseal gap model. Thirty paired humeri from adult, large breed dogs were separated into equal groups based on testing: static compression, cyclic compression, and cyclic torsion. Humeral constructs stabilised with LCP were significantly stiffer than those plated with LC-DCP when loaded in static axial compression (P = 0.0004). When cyclically loaded in axial compression, the LCP constructs were significantly less stiff than the LC-DCP constructs (P = 0.0029). Constructs plated with LCP were significantly less resistant to torsion over 500 cycles than those plated with LC-DCP (P<0.0001). The increased stiffness of LCP constructs in monotonic loading compared to constructs stabilised with non-locking plates may be attributed to the stability afforded by the plate-screw interface of locking plates. The LCP constructs demonstrated less stiffness in dynamic testing in this model, likely due to plate-bone offset secondary to non-anatomic contouring and occasional incomplete seating of the locking screws when using the torque-limiting screw driver. Resolution of these aspects of LCP application may help improve the stiffness of fixation in fractures modeled by the experimental set-up of this investigation.

You may also be interested in...

1.
M. DeTora1, K. Kraus2

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2008 21 4: 318-322

http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-07-04-0034

2.
A. Z. Aguila1 , J. M. Manos2 , A. S. Orlansky2 , R. J. Todhunter1 , E. J. Trotter 1 , M. C. H. van der Meulen2

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2005 18 4: 220-226

3.

C. W. Bruce (1), T. W. G. Gibson (2), R. J. Runciman (3)

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2014 27 6: 430-435

http://dx.doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-14-01-0001