Evaluation of Composite Resin Materials for Maxillomandibular Fixation in Cats for Treatment of Jaw Fractures and Temporomandibular Joint Luxations

Objective: To identify a method of composite application for maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) in cats that ensures the material will remain bonded during convalescence but be easy to remove with a low complication rate. Study Design: Experimental study Sample Population: Feline cadavers (n=88). Meth...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Veterinary surgery 2011-04, Vol.40 (3), p.357-368
Main Authors: Hoffer, Melissa, Manfra Marretta, Sandra, Kurath, Peter, Johnson, Ann, Griffon, Dominique, Schaeffer, David, Pijanowski, Gerald, Przywara, John
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Animals
Biomechanical Phenomena
Cadaver
Cats
Composite materials
Composite Resins
Fracture Fixation, Internal - methods
Fracture Fixation, Internal - veterinary
Fractures
Jaw - injuries
Joint Dislocations - surgery
Joint Dislocations - veterinary
Materials Testing
Mouth
Resins
Surgery
Temporomandibular Joint - injuries
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: To identify a method of composite application for maxillomandibular fixation (MMF) in cats that ensures the material will remain bonded during convalescence but be easy to remove with a low complication rate. Study Design: Experimental study Sample Population: Feline cadavers (n=88). Methods: MMF was applied using composite to 4 groups of 22 feline cadaver heads each. The protocols were: group CR: acid etch and composite resin; group CR+: acid etch, bonding agent, and composite resin; group FR50: partial surface acid etch and flowable composite resin; group FR100: complete surface acid etch and flowable composite resin. Removal time and complication rate were noted. Load to failure was determined by tensile loading. Results: Load to failure was similar for groups CR and CR+ and for groups FR50 and FR100; however, load to failure for groups FR50 and FR100 was higher than groups CR and CR+ (P
ISSN:0161-3499
1532-950X
DOI:10.1111/j.1532-950X.2010.00782.x