Literature DB >> 11052375

Stress protection due to plates: myth or reality? A parametric analysis made using the composite beam theory.

J Cordey1, S M Perren, S G Steinemann.   

Abstract

A generally accepted idea has been that plate fixation of fractures may result in the structural adaptation of bone (bone loss) to reduced stress (stress protection) with the subsequent danger of refracture after implant removal. This was the negative aspect of stress protection. For this reason, it was proposed that plates made from more deformable materials be used (titanium, polymers or carbon fibres). A theoretical analysis using composite beam theory, with different loading conditions (axial load and bending), demonstrates that stress protection, i.e. early temporary porosis, is a myth. Mechanics of materials shows that when an over-large plate is fixed to small bones (as in small animals, e.g. rabbits), the reduction of bone strain is exaggerated; in contrast, using plates of varying flexibility (steel, titanium or carbon fibre) on large bones leads to strain reduction with an astonishingly similar amplitude.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11052375     DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(00)80026-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  7 in total

1.  Peculiarities of employment of polymeric miniplates for mandibular osteosynthesis: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Yan Vares
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2013-03

2.  Bone: Silk, metal and bone: why take implants out?

Authors:  Per Aspenberg
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2014-04-08       Impact factor: 20.543

3.  Biomechanics of bone-fracture fixation by stiffness-graded plates in comparison with stainless-steel plates.

Authors:  V K Ganesh; K Ramakrishna; Dhanjoo N Ghista
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2005-07-27       Impact factor: 2.819

4.  Comparison of a new minimum contact locking plate and the limited contact dynamic compression plate in an osteoporotic fracture model.

Authors:  Yan Xiong; Yufeng Zhao; Ziming Wang; Quanyin Du; Weijun Chen; Aimin Wang
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-12-17       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  PEEK biomaterials in trauma, orthopedic, and spinal implants.

Authors:  Steven M Kurtz; John N Devine
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2007-08-07       Impact factor: 12.479

6.  Locking v/s non-locking reconstruction plates in mandibular reconstruction.

Authors:  Bhupendra Harjani; R K Singh; U S Pal; Geeta Singh
Journal:  Natl J Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2012-07

7.  Long-term Evaluation Using Finite Element Analysis of Bone Atrophy Changes after Locking Plate Fixation of Forearm Diaphyseal Fracture.

Authors:  Tetsuya Hirashima; Yusuke Matsuura; Takane Suzuki; Tomoyo Akasaka; Aya Kanazuka; Seiji Ohtori
Journal:  J Hand Surg Glob Online       Date:  2021-06-14
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.