Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the mechanical stability of three types of plate systems for opening wedge high tibial osteotomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-eight fresh frozen porcine tibia specimens were assigned to three different fixation device groups: Aescular group (16 specimens) was fixed with Aescular plates; Puddu group (16 specimens) with a Puddu plate, and TomoFix group (16 specimens) with a TomoFix plate. We compared axial displacements under compression loads from 200 to 2,000 N and maximal loads at failure among 8 specimens per group. We also compared displacements under cyclic load after 100 cycles at a compressive load of 2,000 N among 8 specimens per group. RESULTS: In all three groups, displacement under compression load increased with the increase in the axial compressive load; however, no significant intergroup differences were observed in the mean values under tested loading conditions. The mean maximal loads at failure were not significantly different (6,055, 6,798, and 6,973 N in the Aescular, Puddu, and TomoFix groups, respectively; p=0.41). While the TomoFix group showed less extension and strain during the cyclic load test, the mean values showed no significant differences among groups. CONCLUSIONS: All three plate systems were found to provide fixation stability suitable for bearing axial compression and cyclic loads while walking.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: