A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Biomechanical comparison of four mandibular angle fracture fixation techniques. | LitMetric

Biomechanical comparison of four mandibular angle fracture fixation techniques.

Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr

Department of Surgery, School of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Published: June 2015

The aim of this study was to make a comparison of the biomechanical behavior of four different internal fixation systems for mandibular angle fractures. A total of 40 polyurethane mandible replicas were employed with different fixation methods: group 1SP, one 2.0-mm four-hole miniplate; group 2PPL, two 2.0-mm four-hole parallel miniplates; group 3DP, one 3D 2.0-mm four-hole miniplate; and group 3DPP, one 3D 2.0-mm eight-hole miniplate. Each group was subjected to incisal or homolateral molar region loading. The load resistance values were measured at load application causing tip displacement of 1, 3, and 5 mm, and at the time at which the system achieves its maximum strength (MS). Means and standard deviations were compared among groups using analysis of variance and the Tukey test. Group 2PPL showed higher strength for all the displacements. For incisal loading, no statistically significant differences were found between groups 1SP, 3DP, and 3DPP. For molar loading, group 1SP and 3DPP showed statistically significant differences. For MS testing, group 1SP and 2PPL showed statistically significant differences in incisal loading; group 1SP and 3DP showed no statistically significant differences; and group 3DPP showed lower values of strength. Two parallel miniplates provide the most favorable mechanical behavior under the conditions tested.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4428728PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0034-1393737DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

group 1sp
16
statistically differences
16
20-mm four-hole
12
miniplate group
12
group
10
mandibular angle
8
four-hole miniplate
8
group 2ppl
8
parallel miniplates
8
group 3dpp
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!