Varus tension testing of fixation devices used in proximal tibial osteotomy.

Contemporary orthopaedics Pub Date : 1995-06-01
Y Zhang, L M Shall, P G Kiritsis, L Wolfinbarger, J R Fairclots
{"title":"Varus tension testing of fixation devices used in proximal tibial osteotomy.","authors":"Y Zhang,&nbsp;L M Shall,&nbsp;P G Kiritsis,&nbsp;L Wolfinbarger,&nbsp;J R Fairclots","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Varus tension testing was performed on 26 matched pairs of tibias after high tibial osteotomy with three different fixation techniques--Coventry stepped staple, Mansat staple blade, and modified tension-band. Biomechanical testing revealed that in group I the Coventry stepped staple and Mansat staple blade yielded similar force at failure values of 132.44 +/- 29.29 and 137.34 +/- 40.84, respectively. In group II, the varus force at failure value was 170.45 +/- 83.95 for the modified tension band device versus 115.27 +/- 67.21 for the Coventry stepped staple device. In group III, the varus force at failure value was 180.26 +/- 82.36 for the modified tension band device versus 109.14 +/- 60.96 for the Mansat staple blade. The findings in this study suggest that the modified tension band technique provides a greater varus force at failure value, approximately 160-170%, compared to the other two techniques. In addition, this device is easy to apply and less expensive, and most orthopaedic surgeons are already familiar with its use.</p>","PeriodicalId":79846,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary orthopaedics","volume":"30 6","pages":"471-6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1995-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Varus tension testing was performed on 26 matched pairs of tibias after high tibial osteotomy with three different fixation techniques--Coventry stepped staple, Mansat staple blade, and modified tension-band. Biomechanical testing revealed that in group I the Coventry stepped staple and Mansat staple blade yielded similar force at failure values of 132.44 +/- 29.29 and 137.34 +/- 40.84, respectively. In group II, the varus force at failure value was 170.45 +/- 83.95 for the modified tension band device versus 115.27 +/- 67.21 for the Coventry stepped staple device. In group III, the varus force at failure value was 180.26 +/- 82.36 for the modified tension band device versus 109.14 +/- 60.96 for the Mansat staple blade. The findings in this study suggest that the modified tension band technique provides a greater varus force at failure value, approximately 160-170%, compared to the other two techniques. In addition, this device is easy to apply and less expensive, and most orthopaedic surgeons are already familiar with its use.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
胫骨近端截骨固定装置内翻张力试验。
采用三种不同的固定技术(Coventry踏步式钉钉、Mansat钉钉刀片和改良张力带)对高位胫骨截骨后的26对胫骨进行内翻张力测试。生物力学测试显示,在第一组中,考文垂式钉钉和Mansat钉钉刀片在破坏值分别为132.44 +/- 29.29和137.34 +/- 40.84时产生相似的力。在第二组中,改良张力带装置的失效值内翻力为170.45 +/- 83.95,而考文垂阶梯钉钉装置的失效值为115.27 +/- 67.21。在第三组中,改良张力带装置失效时的内翻力为180.26 +/- 82.36,而Mansat钉片的内翻力为109.14 +/- 60.96。本研究结果表明,与其他两种技术相比,改良张力带技术在失效值时提供了更大的内翻力,约为160-170%。此外,该设备易于使用且价格较低,大多数骨科医生已经熟悉其使用方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Management of supracondylar fractures proximal to total knee arthroplasty with the GSH supracondylar nail. Allograft safety: viral inactivation with bone demineralization. Pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: report of a series of 23 patients. Difficulty in removal of the distal locking device of the Brooker-Wills tibial nail. Symposium: management of infections in total joint replacements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1