English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Received: Revised: Accepted: 2013–11–29 2014–05–13 2014–05–20 LC–DCP is claimed to be a better implant as compared with the conventional DCP, with respect to low–bone–surface–contact, decreased incidence of porosity, increased and better vascularity of bone tissue, and earlier healing time. In the present study the experimental study was performed on 8– adult dogs divided into 2–groups, A and B. In Groups A and B, DCP and LC–DCP implants were used, respectively. The efficacy of the two plate systems was assessed on the basis of physiological parameters, radio–graphic evaluation. Each dog was radio graphed with medio–lateral projection (ACOMA, JAPAN, Df–50). The radiographs were obtained at an interval of 2 weeks to examine the progress of callus formation with respect to each plate fixation system. Group A showed not good callus formation as some have large callus. Group B dogs showed ideal fixation of implant with accurate Small callus formation. From all this results of this study clearly proved that LC–DCP is better implant than DCP in terms of above parameters for repair of femoral fracture especially in dogs. All copyrights reserved to Nexus® academic publishers

Comparative Efficacy of Limited Contact-Dynamic Compression Plate and Dynamic Compression Plate for Repair of Diaphyseal Femoral Fracture in Dogs