| Literature DB >> 19404810 |
Yngvar Krukhaug1, Nils R Gjerdet, Odd J Lundberg, Peer K Lilleng, Leiv M Hove.
Abstract
BACKGROUND ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19404810 PMCID: PMC2823159 DOI: 10.3109/17453670902947440
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Orthop ISSN: 1745-3674 Impact factor: 3.717
Median total amount of mineral in and mean bone density of the distal radius
| Mean total amount of mineral, g (range) (SD) | Mean bone density, g/cm2 (range) (SD) | |
|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | 1.6 (0.9–2.6) (0.61) | 0.34 (0.21–0.51) (0.11) |
| Group 2 | 1.8 (0.9–2.2) (0.55) | 0.32 (0.17–0.44) (0.09) |
| Group 3 | 1.8 (0.4–2.7) (0.74) | 0.32 (0.08–0.54) (0.14) |
| Group 4 | 1.7 (1.0–2.6) (0.57) | 0.33 (0.22–0.51) (0.09) |
| Group 5 | 1.7 (1.0–2.2) (0.51) | 0.32 (0.23–0.41) (0.07) |
| Group 6 | 1.7 (1.0–2.1) (0.43) | 0.31 (0.22–0.41) (0.08) |
Figure 1.The implants. Group 1: three 1.6-mm K-wires. Group 2: Synthes stainless steel 3.5-mm dorsal locking T-plate. Group 3: AO Synthes stainless steel Dorsal Distal Radius Plate. Group 4: Synthes stainless steel Volar Distal Radius Plate. Group 5: Synthes LCP Distal Radius Plate 2.4-mm, volar. Group 6: Synthes LCP Buttress Plate 2.4-mm for distal radius, volar.
Figure 2.The placement of the 3 K-wires.
Figure 3.The osteotomy gap.
Figure 4.The test set-up.
Figure 5.Typical load/deformation curve.
Figure 6.Means of the biomechanical variables measured. The whiskers represent standard deviation. A. Maximum load. B. Yield load. C. Rigidity. In all groups, n = 7 except for the maximum load for the pin group and the LCP Distal Radius plate group, where n = 6.
Mean differences in the mean yield load, with 95% CI in parentheses
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | – | 584 (203, 964) | 362 (–15, 739) | 319 (–53, 691) | 550 (179, 921) | 567 (191, 944) |
| Group 2 | –221 (–596, 152) | –264 (–642, 112) | –34 (–414, 347) | 16 (–400, 368) | ||
| Group 3 | –43 (–420, 334) | 188 (–187, 562) | 205 (–172, 582) | |||
| Group 4 | 231 (–143, 605) | 248 (–124, 621) | ||||
| Group 5 | 17 (–363, 397) | |||||
| Group 6 | – |
p ≤ 0.05.
Table 3.Mean differences in mean stiffness, with 95% CI in parentheses
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | – | 364 (150, 578) | 67 (–147, 281) | 170 (–44, 383) | 270 (56, 484) | 247 (33, 461) |
| Group 2 | –297 (–511, –83) | –194 (–408, 20) | –94 (–308, 120) | –117 (–331, 97) | ||
| Group 3 | 103 (–111, 317) | 203 (–11, 417) | 180 (–34, 394) | |||
| Group 4 | 100 (–114, 314) | 77 (–137, 291) | ||||
| Group 5 | –23 (–237, 191) | |||||
| Group 6 | – |
p ≤ 0.05.
Table 4. Mean differences in mean maximal load, with 95% CI in parentheses
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | Group 4 | Group 5 | Group 6 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | – | 627 (152, 1,104) | 239 (–229, 707) | 453 (2, 904) | 957 (496, 1417) | 740 (276, 1,204) | |
| Group 2 | –389 (–832, 54) | –175 (–624, 275) | 329 (–147, 805) | 112 (–352, 577) | |||
| Group 3 | 214 (–235, 663) | 718 (257, 1,179) | 501 (52, 951) | ||||
| Group 4 | 503 (45, 962) | 287 (–147, 721) | |||||
| Group 5 | –216 (–689, 257) | ||||||
| Group 6 | – |
p ≤ 0.05.