Comparison of Multistage Versus One‐Stage Destabilization of a Type II External Fixator Used to Stabilize an Oblique Tibial Osteotomy in Dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical effects of multistage versus one-stage destabilization of a type II external skeletal fixator (ESF) used to stabilize an oblique unstable tibial osteotomy in dogs. STUDY DESIGN: In vitro, in vivo, and ex vivo experimental study. ANIMAL POPULATION: Twelve healthy adult dogs. METHODS: The biomechanical characteristics of the type II ESF used in this study were determined. This fixator was applied to both tibiae of two groups of 6 dogs to stabilize a 2-mm-wide oblique osteotomy. One fixator on each dog remained unchanged throughout the 11-week study (control group). The fixator on the opposite limb was destabilized late and acutely in one group of dogs (single-stage) and early and progressively in the other (multistage). Clinical examination, radiographic examination, and force-plate analysis were used to evaluate the results. All dogs were euthanatized at 11 weeks. All tibiae were scanned to determine the cross-sectional area of the callus in the center of the osteotomy and subjected to biomechanical tests to determine mean pull-out strength of pins and callus strength and stiffness. RESULTS: Stiffness of the type II ESF used in this study was 578 N/mm in axial compression, 0.767 Nm/deg in torsion, 261 N/mm in medio-lateral bending, and 25 N/mm in cranio-caudal bending. Peak vertical forces of the hindlimbs were significantly lower at 2.5 and 5 weeks than before surgery. Peak vertical forces of the hindlimbs did not change before and after destabilization. No significant differences could be detected between the two destabilization sequences or between all control tibiae and pooled destabilized tibiae with regards to radiographic evaluation of the healing osteotomy, cross-sectional periosteal callus area, mean pull-out strength of transfixation pins, callus strength, and callus stiffness. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Bone healing of unstable osteotomies stabilized with a type II ESF is not significantly enhanced by staged destabilization of the fixation as performed in this study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".