Canine Vertebral Screw and Rod Fixation System: Design and Mechanical Testing
Publication date
2018-02
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To develop the canine vertebral screw and rod fixation system (CVSRF) and to compare the biomechanical properties between CVSRF and the screw and polymethylmethacrylate (Screw-PMMA) technique for internal fixation of the vertebral column in dogs. METHODS: The CVSRF consisted of vertebral screws with monoaxial side-loaded head, rods and specific inner screws connecting rod to the screw head. The CVSRF prototype was made from titanium alloy and manufactured by the rapid prototype machine. Vertebrectomy models were simulated by ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene blocks and tested with the CVSRF system (n = 8) and the Screw-PMMA technique (n = 8). The models were developed according to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM F-1717-04). The biomechanical parameters were the compressive bending yield load, the compressive bending stiffness, the compressive ultimate load and the load displacement curve. RESULTS: The mean values of the compressive bending yield load, compressive bending stiffness and compressive ultimate load of the CVSRF were significantly higher than those of the Screw-PMMA technique (p < 0.01). The load displacement curve of the CVSRF showed higher rigidity and durability than that of the Screw-PMMA technique. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: This mechanical study indicated that the CVSRF system can be used for canine vertebral stabilization and the biomechanical properties were better than those for the Screw-PMMA device.
Keywords
Animals, Bone Screws/veterinary, Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging, Dogs, Equipment Design/veterinary, Internal Fixators/veterinary, Materials Testing/veterinary, Radiography/veterinary
Citation
Lewchalermwong, P, Suwanna, N & Meij, B P 2018, 'Canine Vertebral Screw and Rod Fixation System : Design and Mechanical Testing', Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 95-101. https://doi.org/10.3415/VCOT-17-03-0040