Show source-provided references
2. An in vitro biomechanical study of bone plate and interlocking nail in a canine diaphyseal femoral fracture model
10.1053/jvet.2001.25863 ↗7. Zhang, P., Wang, X., Lin, Z., Lin, H., Zhang, Z., Li, W., Yang, X., and Cui, J. (2017). Ti-based biomedical material modified with TiOx/TiNx duplex bioactivity film via Micro-Arc oxidation and nitrogen ion implantation. Nanomaterials, 7.
10.3390/nano7100343 ↗10. Van der Elst, M., Dijkema, A., Klein, C., Patka, P., and Haarman, H.T.M. (1992). Biodegradable PLA Versus Stainless Steel Intramedullary Devices for Fracture Fixation. A Comperative Histological Study. Degradation Phenomena on Polymeric Biomaterials, Springer.
10.1007/978-3-642-77563-5_14 ↗11. Bone tissue response to biodegradable polymers used for intra medullary fracture fixation: A long-term in vivo study in sheep femora
10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00117-3 ↗13. Characteristics of biodegradable implants
14. Preparation and characterization of PLA/PCL/HA composite scaffolds using indirect 3D printing for bone tissue engineering
10.1016/j.msec.2019.109960 ↗17. Pitjamit, S., Thunsiri, K., Nakkiew, W., Wongwichai, T., Pothacharoen, P., and Wattanutchariya, W. (2020). The possibility of interlocking nail fabrication from FFF 3D printing PLA/PCL/HA composites coated by local silk fibroin for canine bone fracture treatment. Materials, 13.
10.3390/ma13071564 ↗19. Tensile properties, tension–tension fatigue and biological response of polyetheretherketone–hydroxyapatite composites for load-bearing orthopedic implants
10.1016/S0142-9612(03)00028-0 ↗21. In vitro biomechanical comparison of a plate-rod combination–construct and an interlocking nail–construct for experimentally induced gap fractures in canine tibiae
10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1536 ↗23. A biomechanical investigation of the effects of static fixation and dynamization after interlocking femoral nailing: A finite element study
10.1097/TA.0b013e3182244027 ↗24. Three-dimensional finite element analysis and comparison of a new intramedullary fixation with interlocking intramedullary nail
10.1007/s12013-014-0254-4 ↗25. Biomechanical analyses of static and dynamic fixation techniques of retrograde interlocking femoral nailing using nonlinear finite element methods
10.1016/j.cmpb.2013.11.002 ↗27. Bureau, M.N., Legoux, J.-G., and Denault, J. (2009). Implantable Biomimetic Prosthetic Bone. (US20090177282A1), Google Patents.
28. A porous polymeric–hydroxyapatite scaffold used for femur fractures treatment: Fabrication, analysis, and simulation
10.1007/s00590-019-02530-3 ↗29. (2020, April 04). Innovative Animal Products. Available online: http://www.innovativeanimal.com/pdf/June%202009%20FINAL.pdf.
31. (2020, May 06). Effects Plots for Analyze Factorial Design. Available online: https://support.minitab.com/en-us/minitab/18/help-and-how-to/modeling-statistics/doe/how-to/factorial/analyze-factorial-design/interpret-the-results/all-statistics-and-graphs/effects-plots/.
33. A biomechanical comparison of unlocked or locked reamed intramedullary nails in the treatment of mid-third simple transverse femoral shaft fractures
37. Influence of intramedullary nail diameter and locking mode on the stability of tibial shaft fracture fixation
10.1007/s00402-008-0700-0 ↗39. Validated finite element models of the proximal femur using two-dimensional projected geometry and bone density
10.1016/j.cmpb.2010.11.008 ↗42. Effect of dynamization in open interlocking nailing of femoral fractures. A prospective randomized comparative study of 50 cases with a 2-year follow-up
45. Treatment for nonunion of the shaft of the humerus: Comparison of plates and Seidel interlocking nails
48. Physical, thermal, and mechanical properties of polymers
49. (2020, May 06). Factors Affecting the Tensile Strength of Materials. Available online: https://medium.com/@prestogroup/factors-affecting-the-tensile-strength-of-materials-bf1548f4e6bd.
50. (2020, May 06). Molar Volume and Density of Polymers. Available online: https://polymerdatabase.com/polymer%20physics/MolarVolume.html?fbclid=IwAR0VYGbdm5Av9G9hBttTGz0BM0_-yE9JGUkREG88ALIeAtbVp7b_PXRyfn4.
52. (2020, May 05). Orthopedic Follow-Up Evaluations: Identifying Complications. Available online: https://todaysveterinarypractice.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2016/06/T1409C09.pdf.
53. DeCamp, C.E. (2015). Brinker, Piermattei and Flo’s Handbook of Small Animal Orthopedics and Fracture Repair, Elsevier Health Sciences. [5th ed.].
55. Patralekh, M.K., and Lal, H. (2020). 3D printing in orthopedic trauma. Precision Medicine for Investigators, Practitioners and Providers, Elsevier.
10.1016/B978-0-12-819178-1.00047-2 ↗56. Allen, B., Moore, C., Seyler, T., and Gall, K. (2020). Modulating antibiotic release from reservoirs in 3D-printed orthopedic devices to treat periprosthetic joint infection. J. Orthop. Res.
10.1002/jor.24640 ↗57. Ahirwar, H., Zhou, Y., Mahapatra, C., Ramakrishna, S., Kumar, P., and Nanda, H.S. (2020). Materials for orthopedic bioimplants: Modulating degradation and surface modification using integrated nanomaterials. Coatings, 10.
10.3390/coatings10030264 ↗