First clinical results of the Locking Compression Plate (LCP)

Sommer, Christoph; Gautier, Emanuel; Müller, M.; Helfet, David L.; Wagner, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.injury.2003.09.024

Cited by 277 publications

(180 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

168

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Currently established indications for their use include complex periarticular and intra articular fractures, osteotomies, periprosthetic fractures, failed fixations, union disturbances, osteoporosis etc. 16,17 Though a few studies assert their superiority over the conventional plating, evidence in literature is still scant. [18][19][20] Analogous biomechanical properties of LCPs and DCPs have been delineated in a radius cadaver model by Gardner et al 21 However, Snow et al, in a biomechanical study of an osteoporotic bone model discovered the LCPs to perform better in the axial compression test when used as a bridge plate against the conventional plates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stabilisation of diaphyseal fractures of both bones forearm with limited contact dynamic compression or locked compression plate: comparison of clinical outcomes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The inception of Locking Compression Plate (LCP) has revolutionized fracture management. With their dramatic success for articular fractures, there is a speculation that they might be more appropriate for diaphyseal fractures as well.Methods: In this randomized prospective cohort study, 56 patients with diaphyseal fractures involving both bones of forearm were segregated into two groups based on internal fixation with Limited contact dynamic compression plate (LC-DCP)(n=28) or with Locking compression plate (LCP)(n=26). Clinical and radiological parameters were studied and functional evaluation was done with Disabilities of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score.Results: Andersons’ criteria was employed to categorize the functional results. The mean duration of surgery and time to union were discovered to be less in favor of LCP group although statistically insignificant. No significant differences in two groups with respect to the functional evaluation (range of movement, Andersons’ criteria and DASH score) and complications could be discerned. No incidence of refracture or synostosis was encountered in any of the group. Conclusions: Although LCP is an effective treatment alternative and may have a subtle edge over LC-DCP in the management of these fractures, their supremacy could not be certified. We deduce that surgical planning and expertise rather than the choice of implant are more pivotal for outstanding results.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stabilisation of diaphyseal fractures of both bones forearm with limited contact dynamic compression or locked compression plate: comparison of clinical outcomes

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…New LCP system was concluded as a mature fixation system with proven worth in complex fracture situations and revision situations. 8 To conclude, LCP fixation of metaphyseal fractures of upper limb gives good and stable fixation even in the presence of comminution and osteoporosis. In this series of cases all the patients showed satisfactory union.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

Clinico-radiological evaluation of juxta articular fractures and diaphyseal fractures of upper limb managed with locking compression plating

Kumar¹,

Salgotra

2012

Medical Journal Armed Forces India

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It is also important to correct angular deformities and achieve good axial and joint alignment. A stable construct provides an advantageous mechanical environment and is a prerequisite for successful bone-healing [8]. The medullary canal of both the proximal and the distal fragment is often sealed by fibrous tissue or a sclerotic-osseous end-cap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Logic Redefined: Unusual Unique Case of Fracture Non – Union Humerus

Pathak¹,

Samant²,

Shahane³

et al. 2013

JCR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Fracture of mid-shaft humerus is a common occurrence. They have been treated with variety of conservative and surgical modalities and yields high rate of union with plate osteosynthesis. Nonunion is a known complication of fracture mid-shaft humerus due to various factors. Repeat surgery, debridement of fracture edges with bone grafting is universally acceptable treatment for fracture mid-shaft humerus non-union. We present a rare case report of 25 year old fracture mid-shaft nonunion humerus in a 60 year old female treated successfully with conservative treatment.

show abstract

First clinical results of the Locking Compression Plate (LCP)

Cited by 277 publications

References 12 publications

Stabilisation of diaphyseal fractures of both bones forearm with limited contact dynamic compression or locked compression plate: comparison of clinical outcomes

Stabilisation of diaphyseal fractures of both bones forearm with limited contact dynamic compression or locked compression plate: comparison of clinical outcomes

Clinico-radiological evaluation of juxta articular fractures and diaphyseal fractures of upper limb managed with locking compression plating

Logic Redefined: Unusual Unique Case of Fracture Non – Union Humerus

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About