Erratum to: Augmentation of diaphyseal fractures of the radius and ulna in toy breed dogs using a free autogenous omental graft and bone plating by W. I. Baltzer et al. (Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2015; 28: 131–139)

2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (02) ◽  
pp. 159-159
2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (02) ◽  
pp. 131-139 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Cooley ◽  
J. J. Warnock ◽  
S. Nemanic ◽  
S. M. Stieger-Vanegas ◽  
W. I. Baltzer

SummaryObjectives: Evaluation of the short-term outcome, duration of bone healing, and complications following bone plate fixation in dogs weighing [uni2264]6 kg, with and without the use of a free autogenous greater omental graft (OG).Materials and methods: A retrospective clinical study reviewed the medical records of 25 dogs of body weight <6 kg with mid to distal diaphyseal fractures of the radius and ulna (29 fractures) treated with open reduction bone plate fixation. Thirteen out of 29 fractures were implanted with an additional 2–3 cm3 OG lateral, cranial, and medial to the fracture site, adjacent to the bone plate.Results: Median time to radiographic healing in OG fractures (n = 11) was 70 days (range 28–98) compared to 106 days (range: 56–144) in non-OG grafted fractures (n = 14). The OG dogs had no major complications; minor complications included oedema, erythema, and mild osteopenia. Six of the eight non-OG dogs for which follow-up could be obtained developed osteopenia necessitating implant removal, four of which re-fractured the radius one to five months after implant removal, with one dog re-fracturing the limb a second time and resulting in amputation. Telephone follow-up of owners of OG dogs (n = 11) three to 15 months (median 10) post-surgery did not identify any signs of lameness or other complications. Owners of the non-OG dogs (n = 8) reported that there were not any signs of lameness six to 48 months (median 36) post-surgery.Clinical relevance: Free autogenous omen-tal grafting of diaphyseal fractures of the radius and ulna was associated with radial and ulnar healing with minimal complications in dogs weighing less than 6 kg.


Injury ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. S4
Author(s):  
T. Kurtulmus ◽  
G. Saka ◽  
N. Saglam ◽  
F. Kücükdurmaz ◽  
U. Öztürk

Author(s):  
Apipop Kritsaneephaiboon ◽  
Watit Wuttimanop ◽  
Surasak Jitprapaikulsarn ◽  
Pornpanit Dissaneewate ◽  
Chulin Chewakidakarn ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Felix G. E. Dyrna ◽  
Daniel M. Avery ◽  
Ryu Yoshida ◽  
David Lam ◽  
Simon Oeckenpöhler ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Metacarpal shaft fractures are common and can be treated nonoperatively. Shortening, angulation, and rotational deformity are indications for surgical treatment. Various forms of treatment with advantages and disadvantages have been documented. The purpose of the study was to determine the stability of fracture fixation with intramedullary headless compression screws in two types of metacarpal shaft fractures and compare them to other common forms of rigid fixation: dorsal plating and lag screw fixation. It was hypothesized that headless compression screws would demonstrate a biomechanical stronger construct. Methods Five matched paired hands (age 60.9 ± 4.6 years), utilizing non-thumb metacarpals, were used for comparative fixation in two fracture types created by an osteotomy. In transverse diaphyseal fractures, fixation by headless compression screws (n = 7) and plating (n = 8) were compared. In long oblique diaphyseal fractures, headless compression screws (n = 8) were compared with plating (n = 8) and lag screws (n = 7). Testing was performed using an MTS frame producing an apex dorsal, three point bending force. Peak load to failure and stiffness were calculated from the load-displacement curve generated. Results For transverse fractures, headless compression screws had a significantly higher stiffness and peak load to failure, means 249.4 N/mm and 584.8 N, than plates, means 129.02 N/mm and 303.9 N (both p < 0.001). For long oblique fractures, stiffness and peak load to failure for headless compression screws were means 209 N/mm and 758.4 N, for plates 258.7 N/mm and 518.5 N, and for lag screws 172.18 N/mm and 234.11 N. There was significance in peak load to failure for headless compression screws vs plates (p = 0.023), headless compression screws vs lag screws (p < 0.001), and plates vs lag screws (p = 0.009). There was no significant difference in stiffness between groups. Conclusion Intramedullary fixation of diaphyseal metacarpal fractures with a headless compression screw provides excellent biomechanical stability. Coupled with lower risks for adverse effects, headless compression screws may be a preferable option for those requiring rapid return to sport or work. Level of evidence Basic Science Study, Biomechanics.


2021 ◽  
pp. 175319342110215
Author(s):  
Birkan Kibar ◽  
Ali Cavit ◽  
Abdullah Örs

We carried out a prospective randomized study to compare the clinical and radiological results of metacarpal diaphyseal fractures treated with retrograde intramedullary headless cannulated screws (IHCS) and plates. Fractures were fixed with IHCS in 34 patients (37 metacarpals) and locked miniplates in 35 patients (40 metacarpals). The mean age was 33 years (range 18–61) in the IHCS group and 32 years (range 17–68) in plate group. All patients were followed up for 1 year. All fractures in the IHCS group united but there was one nonunion in the plate group. At final follow-up, there was no significant difference between the groups in total active movement, visual analogue pain score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score and grip strength, although the study was not sufficiently powered to exclude differences with certainty. IHCS is a safe and fast technique that is a good alternative to plate fixation in metacarpal diaphyseal fractures. Level of evidence: I


2015 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-275 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Çağrı Tekin ◽  
Mehmet Selçuk Saygılı ◽  
Müjdat Adaş ◽  
Haluk Çabuk ◽  
Samet Murat Arslan ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 527-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Castañeda ◽  
Rolf K.H. Kinne

2000 ◽  
Vol 120 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 281-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Fjalestad ◽  
Knut Strømsøe ◽  
Petter Salvesen ◽  
Bjørg Rostad

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document