Yayın:
Comparison of four different techniques for performing an osteotomy

dc.contributor.authorElmadag, M.
dc.contributor.authorUzer, Gökçer
dc.contributor.authorYildiz, Fati̇h
dc.contributor.authorErden, Tunay
dc.contributor.authorBilsel, K.
dc.contributor.authorBuyukpinarbasili, Nur
dc.contributor.authorUsumez, A.
dc.contributor.authorBozdag, E.
dc.contributor.authorSen, C.
dc.contributor.ituauthorBozdağ, Süreyya Ergün
dc.date.accessioned2026-01-25T00:22:21Z
dc.date.issued2015-12-01
dc.description.abstractThis animal study compares different methods of performing an osteotomy, including using an Erbium-doped Yttrium Aluminum Garnet laser, histologically, radiologically and biomechanically. A total of 24 New Zealand rabbits were divided into four groups (Group I: multihole-drilling; Group II: Gigli saw; Group III: electrical saw blade and Group IV: laser). A proximal transverse diaphyseal osteotomy was performed on the right tibias of the rabbits after the application of a circular external fixator. The rabbits were killed six weeks after the procedure, the operated tibias were resected and radiographs taken.The specimens were tested biomechanically using three-point bending forces, and four tibias from each group were examined histologically. Outcome parameters were the biomechanical stability of the tibias as assessed by the failure to load and radiographic and histological examination of the osteotomy site.The osteotomies healed in all specimens both radiographically and histologically. The differences in the mean radiographic (p = 0.568) and histological (p = 0.71) scores, and in the mean failure loads (p = 0.180) were not statistically significant between the groups.Different methods of performing an osteotomy give similar quality of union. The laser osteotomy, which is not widely used in orthopaedics is an alternative to the current methods.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1628–33.
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.97b12.36060
dc.description.urihttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26637676
dc.description.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.97b12.36060
dc.description.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12645/37293
dc.description.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12645/5163
dc.identifier.doi10.1302/0301-620x.97b12.36060
dc.identifier.eissn2049-4408
dc.identifier.endpage1633
dc.identifier.issn2049-4394
dc.identifier.openairedoi_dedup___::3e66294569b49546126978718dc57837
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0002-7402-756x
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7412-1129
dc.identifier.startpage1628
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11527/40741
dc.identifier.volume97-B
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherBritish Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery
dc.relation.ispartofThe Bone & Joint Journal
dc.rightsOPEN
dc.sdg.typeGoal 2: Zero Hunger
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectTibia
dc.subjectBiomechanical Phenomena
dc.subjectOsteotomy
dc.subjectRadiography
dc.subjectDisease Models, Animal
dc.subjectPseudarthrosis
dc.subjectAnimals
dc.subjectRabbits
dc.subjectStress, Mechanical
dc.titleComparison of four different techniques for performing an osteotomy
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
person.identifier.orcid0000-0001-7412-1129

Dosyalar

Koleksiyonlar