Literature DB >> 1447609

In vitro strength analysis of sagittal split osteotomy fixation: noncompression monocortical plates versus bicortical position screws.

B Anucul1, P D Waite, J E Lemons.   

Abstract

An in vitro study using bovine ribs was performed to compare the strength of monocortical plates with bicortical position screws. An osteotomy was created to simulate a sagittal split and a 5-mm bone gap was produced. Four study groups were created: screw nongap, screw with gap, plate nongap, and plate with gap. Parameters of strength were analyzed by elastic deformation, stiffness ratio, permanent deformation, and breaking load. The results showed that monocortical plate fixation in bovine ribs provides less rigidity and is more susceptible to deformation than is bicortical position screw fixation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1447609     DOI: 10.1016/0278-2391(92)90230-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg        ISSN: 0278-2391            Impact factor:   1.895


  8 in total

1.  Analysis of Mandibular Test Specimens Used to Assess a Bone Fixation System.

Authors:  Leandro Stocco Baccarin; Renato Correa Viana Casarin; Jorge Vicente Lopes-da-Silva; Luis Augusto Passeri
Journal:  Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr       Date:  2014-11-20

2.  In vitro biomechanical evaluation of the effect of an additional L-shaped plate on straight or box plate fixation in sagittal split ramus osteotomy using a bioabsorbable plate system.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Matsushita; Nobuo Inoue; Yasunori Totsuka
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2011-03-04

3.  Mechanical and photoelastic analysis of conventional screws and cannulated screws for sagittal split osteotomy fixation: a comparative study.

Authors:  Cristina Jardelino de Lima; Saulo Gabriel Moreira Falci; Danillo Costa Rodrigues; Érica Cristina Marchiori; Roger Willian Fernandes Moreira
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-06-06

4.  Does the type of sagittal split ramus osteotomy influence fixation strength? Evaluation of the mechanical behavior of two types of fixation used in three types of sagittal split ramus osteotomy.

Authors:  Soraya da Silva Oliveira; Pedro Henrique Mattos de Carvalho; Cássio Edvard Sverzut; Alexandre Elias Trivellato
Journal:  Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2022-01-12

5.  An in vitro comparison between two different designs of sagittal split ramus osteotomy.

Authors:  Valdir Cabral Andrade; Leonardo Flores Luthi; Fabio Loureiro Sato; Leandro Pozzer; Sergio Olate; Jose Ricardo Albergaria-Barbosa
Journal:  J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2015-06-23

6.  Comparison of strengths of five internal fixation methods used after bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy: An in vitro study.

Authors:  Farzin Sarkarat; Atiye Ahmady; Farzam Farahmand; Ali Fateh; Roozbeh Kahali; Amir Nourani; Vahid Rakhshan
Journal:  Dent Res J (Isfahan)       Date:  2020-08-14

Review 7.  TMJ response to mandibular advancement surgery: an overview of risk factors.

Authors:  José Valladares-Neto; Lucia Helena Cevidanes; Wesley Cabral Rocha; Guilherme de Araújo Almeida; João Batista de Paiva; José Rino-Neto
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.698

8.  Biomechanical in vitro evaluation of three stable internal fixation techniques used in sagittal osteotomy of the mandibular ramus: a study in sheep mandibles.

Authors:  Leandro Benetti de Olivera; Eduardo Sant' Ana; Antonio José Manzato; Fábio Luis Bunemer Guerra; G William Arnett
Journal:  J Appl Oral Sci       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.698

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.