ArticlePloS one2023
An assessment of the fixin tplo jig to generate effective compression using a transverse fracture model.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to determine compressive loads that could be generated using a tibial plateau leveling osteotomy (TPLO) jig with a tensioned strand of 18-gauge stainless steel orthopedic wire in a simulated transverse fracture model. The wire was sequentially tensioned using heavy needle holders or an AO wire tightener. Recorded loads were subsequently compared to loads generated by applying a 3.5 mm limited contact-dynamic compression plate (LC-DCP) as a compression plate. Two segments of 2 cm diameter Delrin rod were placed in a testing apparatus and used to simulate a transverse fracture. A load cell was interposed between the two segments to measure the compressive loads generated during the application of the TPLO jig or the LC-DCP. Compression was generated by sequential tensioning a strand of 18-gauge wire secured through the base of the arms of the TPLO jig or by placing one or two load screws in the LC-DCP. Wires were tensioned using heavy needle holders or an AO wire tightener. Eight replicates of each construct were tested. Recorded loads were compared using a one-way repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey Honestly Significant Difference test. The wire being tensioned broke while attempting a second quarter rotation of the needle holders and when the crank handle of the AO wire tightener was advanced beyond two rotations. The mean + SD peak compressive loads recorded when tensioning the wire using the heavy needle holders and AO wire tightener was 148 ± 7 N and 217 ± 16 N, respectfully. The mean ± SD load recorded after placement of the first and second load screw in the LC-DCP was 131 ± 39 N and 296 ± 49 N, respectively. The compression generated by placing two load screws in the LC-DCP was superior to the compression generated using the jig. The maximum load recorded by tensioning the wire secured through the TPLO jig using the AO wire tightener was superior to the compression generated by placing a single load screw and tensioning the wire using needle holders. Our results demonstrate that the TPLO jig allows surgeons to compress transverse fractures or osteotomies effectively. Tensioning the AO wire tightener allows for sequential tensioning and generates superior compressive loads than tensioning wires with heavy needle holders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.