Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures?
Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofaci...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Arjmand, Hanieh [verfasserIn] Billig, Allan [verfasserIn] Clement, Allison [verfasserIn] Hopfgartner, Adam [verfasserIn] Whyne, Cari M. [verfasserIn] Fialkov, Jeffrey A. [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2023 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery - Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006, 84, Seite 47-53 |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:84 ; pages:47-53 |
DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
ELV062247379 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | ELV062247379 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230926130927.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230827s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)ELV062247379 | ||
035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
084 | |a 44.65 |2 bkl | ||
100 | 1 | |a Arjmand, Hanieh |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
520 | |a Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation | |
650 | 4 | |a Craniomaxillofacial | |
650 | 4 | |a Experimental testing | |
650 | 4 | |a Fracture displacement | |
700 | 1 | |a Billig, Allan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Clement, Allison |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Hopfgartner, Adam |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Whyne, Cari M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Fialkov, Jeffrey A. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |d Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 |g 84, Seite 47-53 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)504862758 |w (DE-600)2214150-9 |w (DE-576)251918033 |x 1878-0539 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:84 |g pages:47-53 |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_32 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_70 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_90 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_100 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_101 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_187 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_370 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2004 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2026 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2034 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2049 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2050 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2059 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2064 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2068 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2088 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2106 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2122 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2129 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2143 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2152 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2153 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2232 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2336 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2470 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2507 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4035 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4242 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4251 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4326 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4333 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4334 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4393 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
936 | b | k | |a 44.65 |j Chirurgie |q VZ |
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 84 |h 47-53 |
author_variant |
h a ha a b ab a c ac a h ah c m w cm cmw j a f ja jaf |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:18780539:2023----::shepitiaineddoehnclytblzzgmtcmx |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2023 |
bklnumber |
44.65 |
publishDate |
2023 |
allfields |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 doi (DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 44.65 bkl Arjmand, Hanieh verfasserin aut Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement Billig, Allan verfasserin aut Clement, Allison verfasserin aut Hopfgartner, Adam verfasserin aut Whyne, Cari M. verfasserin aut Fialkov, Jeffrey A. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 84, Seite 47-53 Online-Ressource (DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 1878-0539 nnns volume:84 pages:47-53 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.65 Chirurgie VZ AR 84 47-53 |
spelling |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 doi (DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 44.65 bkl Arjmand, Hanieh verfasserin aut Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement Billig, Allan verfasserin aut Clement, Allison verfasserin aut Hopfgartner, Adam verfasserin aut Whyne, Cari M. verfasserin aut Fialkov, Jeffrey A. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 84, Seite 47-53 Online-Ressource (DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 1878-0539 nnns volume:84 pages:47-53 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.65 Chirurgie VZ AR 84 47-53 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 doi (DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 44.65 bkl Arjmand, Hanieh verfasserin aut Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement Billig, Allan verfasserin aut Clement, Allison verfasserin aut Hopfgartner, Adam verfasserin aut Whyne, Cari M. verfasserin aut Fialkov, Jeffrey A. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 84, Seite 47-53 Online-Ressource (DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 1878-0539 nnns volume:84 pages:47-53 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.65 Chirurgie VZ AR 84 47-53 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 doi (DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 44.65 bkl Arjmand, Hanieh verfasserin aut Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement Billig, Allan verfasserin aut Clement, Allison verfasserin aut Hopfgartner, Adam verfasserin aut Whyne, Cari M. verfasserin aut Fialkov, Jeffrey A. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 84, Seite 47-53 Online-Ressource (DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 1878-0539 nnns volume:84 pages:47-53 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.65 Chirurgie VZ AR 84 47-53 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 doi (DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 DE-627 ger DE-627 rda eng 610 VZ 44.65 bkl Arjmand, Hanieh verfasserin aut Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? 2023 nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement Billig, Allan verfasserin aut Clement, Allison verfasserin aut Hopfgartner, Adam verfasserin aut Whyne, Cari M. verfasserin aut Fialkov, Jeffrey A. verfasserin aut Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006 84, Seite 47-53 Online-Ressource (DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 1878-0539 nnns volume:84 pages:47-53 GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 44.65 Chirurgie VZ AR 84 47-53 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery 84, Seite 47-53 volume:84 pages:47-53 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery 84, Seite 47-53 volume:84 pages:47-53 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
bklname |
Chirurgie |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement |
dewey-raw |
610 |
isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
container_title |
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Arjmand, Hanieh @@aut@@ Billig, Allan @@aut@@ Clement, Allison @@aut@@ Hopfgartner, Adam @@aut@@ Whyne, Cari M. @@aut@@ Fialkov, Jeffrey A. @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2023-01-01T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
504862758 |
dewey-sort |
3610 |
id |
ELV062247379 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV062247379</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230926130927.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230827s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV062247379</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Arjmand, Hanieh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures?</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Craniomaxillofacial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Experimental testing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fracture displacement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Billig, Allan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clement, Allison</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hopfgartner, Adam</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Whyne, Cari M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fialkov, Jeffrey A.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">84, Seite 47-53</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)504862758</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2214150-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)251918033</subfield><subfield code="x">1878-0539</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:84</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:47-53</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="j">Chirurgie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">84</subfield><subfield code="h">47-53</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Arjmand, Hanieh |
spellingShingle |
Arjmand, Hanieh ddc 610 bkl 44.65 misc Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation misc Craniomaxillofacial misc Experimental testing misc Fracture displacement Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
authorStr |
Arjmand, Hanieh |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)504862758 |
format |
electronic Article |
dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
elsevier |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1878-0539 |
topic_title |
610 VZ 44.65 bkl Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation Craniomaxillofacial Experimental testing Fracture displacement |
topic |
ddc 610 bkl 44.65 misc Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation misc Craniomaxillofacial misc Experimental testing misc Fracture displacement |
topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 44.65 misc Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation misc Craniomaxillofacial misc Experimental testing misc Fracture displacement |
topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 44.65 misc Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation misc Craniomaxillofacial misc Experimental testing misc Fracture displacement |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |
hierarchy_parent_id |
504862758 |
dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |
isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)504862758 (DE-600)2214150-9 (DE-576)251918033 |
title |
Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV062247379 (ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5 |
title_full |
Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
author_sort |
Arjmand, Hanieh |
journal |
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |
journalStr |
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
false |
dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2023 |
contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
container_start_page |
47 |
author_browse |
Arjmand, Hanieh Billig, Allan Clement, Allison Hopfgartner, Adam Whyne, Cari M. Fialkov, Jeffrey A. |
container_volume |
84 |
class |
610 VZ 44.65 bkl |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Arjmand, Hanieh |
doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 |
dewey-full |
610 |
author2-role |
verfasserin |
title_sort |
is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
title_auth |
Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
abstract |
Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. |
abstractGer |
Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. |
abstract_unstemmed |
Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading. |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_32 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_90 GBV_ILN_100 GBV_ILN_101 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_187 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_224 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_702 GBV_ILN_2001 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2004 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2007 GBV_ILN_2008 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2010 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2015 GBV_ILN_2020 GBV_ILN_2021 GBV_ILN_2025 GBV_ILN_2026 GBV_ILN_2027 GBV_ILN_2034 GBV_ILN_2044 GBV_ILN_2048 GBV_ILN_2049 GBV_ILN_2050 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2056 GBV_ILN_2059 GBV_ILN_2061 GBV_ILN_2064 GBV_ILN_2068 GBV_ILN_2088 GBV_ILN_2106 GBV_ILN_2110 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_2112 GBV_ILN_2122 GBV_ILN_2129 GBV_ILN_2143 GBV_ILN_2152 GBV_ILN_2153 GBV_ILN_2190 GBV_ILN_2232 GBV_ILN_2336 GBV_ILN_2470 GBV_ILN_2507 GBV_ILN_4035 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4242 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4251 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4326 GBV_ILN_4333 GBV_ILN_4334 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4393 GBV_ILN_4700 |
title_short |
Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures? |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Billig, Allan Clement, Allison Hopfgartner, Adam Whyne, Cari M. Fialkov, Jeffrey A. |
author2Str |
Billig, Allan Clement, Allison Hopfgartner, Adam Whyne, Cari M. Fialkov, Jeffrey A. |
ppnlink |
504862758 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
false |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086 |
up_date |
2024-07-06T18:34:26.262Z |
_version_ |
1803855715383640064 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV062247379</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230926130927.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230827s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.bjps.2023.04.086</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV062247379</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S1748-6815(23)00242-5</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rda</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Arjmand, Hanieh</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Is three-point fixation needed to mechanically stabilize zygomaticomaxillary complex fractures?</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2023</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fixation is critical in zygomaticomaxillary complex (ZMC) fractures to avoid malunion; however, controversy exists as to how much hardware is required to achieve adequate stability. Current fixation regimens may not represent the minimum stabilization needed for uneventful healing. Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) computational models have shown limited load transmission through the infraorbital rim (IOR), and a previous experimental study of ZMC fractures has suggested that IOR plating does not alter CMF bone strain patterns. This study aimed to measure the impact of stabilization on fracture site displacement under muscle loading, testing the hypothesis that three-point fixation is not critical for ZMC fracture stability. Four ZMC complex fractures were simulated on two cadaveric samples and stabilized with three-point plating. Displacements simulating mouth openings of 20 mm and 30 mm were applied to the mandible using a custom apparatus. Fracture gap displacement under load was measured at multiple points along each fracture line, and bone strain was captured using a combination of uniaxial and rosette gauges. Data capture was repeated with the IOR plate removed (two-point fixation) and with the zygomaticomaxillary plate removed (one-point fixation). Fracture displacement under muscle loading was consistent, with gaps of less than 1 mm in 95% of cases (range 0.05–1.44 mm), reflecting clinical stability. Large variabilities were observed in the strain measurements, which may reflect the complexity of CMFS load patterns and the sensitivity of strain values to gauge placement. This study supports the concept of hardware reduction, suggesting that two-point (or even one-point) fixation may provide sufficient stability for a ZMC fracture under applied muscle loading.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Zygomaticomaxillary complex fracture fixation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Craniomaxillofacial</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Experimental testing</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fracture displacement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Billig, Allan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Clement, Allison</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hopfgartner, Adam</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Whyne, Cari M.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fialkov, Jeffrey A.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Amsterdam [u.a.] : Elsevier, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">84, Seite 47-53</subfield><subfield code="h">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)504862758</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2214150-9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)251918033</subfield><subfield code="x">1878-0539</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:84</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:47-53</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_32</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_90</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_100</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_187</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_224</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2001</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2004</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2007</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2008</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2010</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2015</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2020</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2025</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2026</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2027</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2034</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2044</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2048</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2049</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2050</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2056</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2059</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2061</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2064</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2068</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2088</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2106</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2122</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2129</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2143</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2152</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2153</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2190</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2232</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2336</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2470</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2507</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4035</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4242</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4251</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4326</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4333</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4334</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4393</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">44.65</subfield><subfield code="j">Chirurgie</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">84</subfield><subfield code="h">47-53</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.3998337 |