Arthrodesis of the Proximal Interphalangeal Joint in the Horse: A Cyclic Biomechanical Comparison of Two and Three Parallel Cortical Screws Inserted in Lag Fashion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the biomechanical cyclic fatigue properties of 2 and 3 parallel transarticular 5.5 mm cortical screws used in arthrodesis of the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized block design, for horse, fixation method (2 versus three 5.5 mm cortical screws), side (right, left) and end (front, hind) in cadaveric equine limbs. SAMPLE POPULATION: Cadaveric adult equine fore- and hindlimbs (n=5 pairs each). METHODS: Two parallel 5.5 mm cortical screws were inserted in lag fashion, transarticularly through the PIP joint in 1 limb of a pair, and in the contralateral limb, three 5.5 mm cortical screws were inserted in similar fashion. Constructs were then tested in 3-point bending in a dorsal-to-palmar (plantar) direction using a materials testing machine using a cyclic load of -500 to -3500 N at a rate of 6 Hz. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in displacement at failure, force at failure or number of cycles between limbs. Forelimb constructs tended to fail at a greater mean displacement than hindlimb constructs but this difference was not significant (P=.06). There was no statistical difference in any tested biomechanical variable between left- and right-sided limbs. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in the number of cycles to failure for the 2 methods tested. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Two 5.5 mm cortical screws inserted in parallel for PIP joint arthrodesis is surgically simpler, results in comparable biomechanical performance in the current model and should perform as well as three 5.5 mm screws under cyclic fatigue conditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".