An in vitro evaluation of distractors used for osteogenesis

Haug, Richard H.; Nuveen, Erik J.; Barber, J.; Storoe, William

doi:10.1016/s1079-2104(98)90198-6

Cited by 26 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These synthetic mandibles also have an established history of prior testing. [6][7][8][9]12 This model also enabled imitation of the screw-bone interface as shown by Bredbenner and Haug,12 who demonstrated that the screw (2.4-mm diameter) insertion torque and pull-out strength for Synbone material were similar to cadaveric bone. Preliminary experiments performed with less dense polyurethane mandibles (Sawbones; Pacific Research Laboratories, Vashon, Wash) showed that they were incomparable to cadaveric bone with respect to fracture load and screw pull-out strength.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…The use of polyurethane mandibles was consistent with previous studies and allowed controlled replication of the clinical situation in which plate bending for contouring to the mandible can affect the physical properties of the plate. [6][7][8][9]12 These synthetic mandibles were anatomically and biomechanically similar to bone; they have a dense outer layer and a porous inner layer that replicate the cortical and cancellous components of bone. 6,7 Their uniformity ensured a consistent sample population and minimized the sample size needed.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous in vitro studies [6][7][8][9] have compared plating constructs in the settings of mandibular fracture repair and orthognathic surgery in a static situation and have been useful in assessing the problems of plate fracture and failure at the screwsubstrate interface. A model that incorporates cyclic fatigue testing of various mandibular plating constructs, however, has not been developed to date.…”

Section: Ridging Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Biomechanical Evaluation of Fixation Techniques for Bridging Segmental Mandibular Defects

Doty

Pienkowski²,

Goltz³

et al. 2004

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To compare biomechanical properties of currently available plating systems used to reconstruct segmental mandibular defects. Design: Controlled in vitro investigation. Setting: Academic medical center laboratory. Interventions: Thirty-two polyurethane mandibles were equally divided among 4 groups: mandibles with a 4-cm lateral segmental defect that was bridged with a (1) 3.0-mm locking-screw reconstruction plate, (2) 2.4-mm low-profile reconstruction plate, or (3) 2.4-mm reconstruction plate and (4) uncut (control) mandibles. All plates were contoured and secured to the synthetic mandibles with 4 bicortical screws on either side of the defect. Three constructs from each group were subjected to contralateral-molar single-load-to-failure testing. Mean yield displacement, yield load, and bending stiffness were quantified and compared among the 4 groups. The singleload-to-failure data were used to establish conditions for fatigue testing; such testing was then performed on the remaining 5 samples in each group. Mean cycles to failure were measured and compared among the 4 groups. Results: Mean yield displacement, yield load, and bending stiffness were comparable among the plated groups. Both the 3.0-mm locking-screw and 2.4-mm lowprofile reconstruction plate designs withstood 1580 and 1124 times more cycles to failure, respectively (P=.005), than did the control group. The other reconstruction plate was also superior to the unplated controls, offering an 865-fold improvement. Conclusions: All 3 mandibular fixation device systems tested produce comparable levels of single load to failure biomechanical integrity; however, the higherprofile plating system design offered slightly superior fatigue performance. No differences in performance were observed between the locking and nonlocking designs; neither failed at the screw-substrate interface.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ridging Reconstructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Biomechanical Evaluation of Fixation Techniques for Bridging Segmental Mandibular Defects

Doty

Pienkowski²,

Goltz³

et al. 2004

Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the in vitro testing neglects to account for lateral forces, such as forces from the suprahyoid muscles that are frequently encountered during mandibular lengthening. 13 The exact response and degree to which lateral counteractive forces affect the bone callus will vary with patient age, etiology, 21 device rigidity, 6,22,23 device orientation, 24,25 and the vector of distraction. [26][27][28] The effects of device orientation have yet to be established in the clinical setting and have thus far been uneventful.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though distraction osteogenesis of the mandible is well reported in the literature, [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17] no study has been published describing the force necessary to distract the human mandible. The purpose of this article is to report laboratory data on the torque-force measurements of an internal craniofacial distractor, the Bone Generator (Inter-Os Technologies Inc, Lone Tree, CO) and to correlate the data to clinical cases of mandibular distraction with the same device (Figs 1, 2).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%