The lingual application of a reconstruction plate: A new method in bridging lower jaw defects

Evaluation of mini-locking plate system in management of body mandibular fracture (Clinical study)

“…At the 4th and 5th weeks postoperative intervals the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2). There was no statistically week the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2), Table (2), Fig (6).…”

“…A disadvantage of conventional bone plate/screw system is that the plate must be perfectly adapted to the underlying bone to prevent alterations in the alignment of the segment and changes in the occlusal relationship. The introduction of locking plate/screw plating systems for the treatment of mandibular fracture has offered certain advantages over other plating systems (5,6) .…”

Evaluation of mini-locking plate system in management of body mandibular fracture (Clinical study)

“…At the 4th and 5th weeks postoperative intervals the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2). There was no statistically week the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2), Table (2), Fig (6).…”

“…A disadvantage of conventional bone plate/screw system is that the plate must be perfectly adapted to the underlying bone to prevent alterations in the alignment of the segment and changes in the occlusal relationship. The introduction of locking plate/screw plating systems for the treatment of mandibular fracture has offered certain advantages over other plating systems (5,6) .…”

Primary oromandibular reconstruction using free flaps and thorp plates in cancer patients: A 5‐year experience

“…4,11 Beginning in the 1960s, several mandibular recon-struction systems were designed using metals like vitallium (chrome-cobalt-molybdenum), 30,34,35 stainless steel, 12,13,22,28,36,37 and titanium alloys. [38][39][40][41] For primary mandibular reconstruction in this series, we used the Locking Screw Reconstruction Plate System (Leibinger Co.), a second-generation THORP titanium plate that is theoretically superior to traditional reconstruction systems (AO/ ASIF, Luhr, etc) for several reasons 38,[42][43][44][45][46] : (1) stability is independent of the contact between the plate undersurface and the bone (thus resorption along the undersurface of the plate is avoided); (2) fixation with only two or three screws at each end of the plate enables optimal stability, so even small bone segments, such as the condylar process, can be integrated and pre-served; and (3) tilting movement of the screws leading to bone resorption and loosening is avoided.…”

Evaluation of mini-locking plate system in management of body mandibular fracture (Clinical study)

“…At the 4th and 5th weeks postoperative intervals the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2). There was no statistically week the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2), Table (2), Fig (6).…”

“…A disadvantage of conventional bone plate/screw system is that the plate must be perfectly adapted to the underlying bone to prevent alterations in the alignment of the segment and changes in the occlusal relationship. The introduction of locking plate/screw plating systems for the treatment of mandibular fracture has offered certain advantages over other plating systems (5,6) .…”

Primary oromandibular reconstruction using free flaps and thorp plates in cancer patients: A 5‐year experience

“…4,11 Beginning in the 1960s, several mandibular recon-struction systems were designed using metals like vitallium (chrome-cobalt-molybdenum), 30,34,35 stainless steel, 12,13,22,28,36,37 and titanium alloys. [38][39][40][41] For primary mandibular reconstruction in this series, we used the Locking Screw Reconstruction Plate System (Leibinger Co.), a second-generation THORP titanium plate that is theoretically superior to traditional reconstruction systems (AO/ ASIF, Luhr, etc) for several reasons 38,[42][43][44][45][46] : (1) stability is independent of the contact between the plate undersurface and the bone (thus resorption along the undersurface of the plate is avoided); (2) fixation with only two or three screws at each end of the plate enables optimal stability, so even small bone segments, such as the condylar process, can be integrated and pre-served; and (3) tilting movement of the screws leading to bone resorption and loosening is avoided.…”

Evaluation of mini-locking plate system in management of body mandibular fracture (Clinical study)

“…At the 4th and 5th weeks postoperative intervals the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2). There was no statistically week the biting force at the right molar region of group (1) was statistically lower than of group (2), Table (2), Fig (6).…”

“…A disadvantage of conventional bone plate/screw system is that the plate must be perfectly adapted to the underlying bone to prevent alterations in the alignment of the segment and changes in the occlusal relationship. The introduction of locking plate/screw plating systems for the treatment of mandibular fracture has offered certain advantages over other plating systems (5,6) .…”

Primary oromandibular reconstruction using free flaps and thorp plates in cancer patients: A 5‐year experience

“…4,11 Beginning in the 1960s, several mandibular recon-struction systems were designed using metals like vitallium (chrome-cobalt-molybdenum), 30,34,35 stainless steel, 12,13,22,28,36,37 and titanium alloys. [38][39][40][41] For primary mandibular reconstruction in this series, we used the Locking Screw Reconstruction Plate System (Leibinger Co.), a second-generation THORP titanium plate that is theoretically superior to traditional reconstruction systems (AO/ ASIF, Luhr, etc) for several reasons 38,[42][43][44][45][46] : (1) stability is independent of the contact between the plate undersurface and the bone (thus resorption along the undersurface of the plate is avoided); (2) fixation with only two or three screws at each end of the plate enables optimal stability, so even small bone segments, such as the condylar process, can be integrated and pre-served; and (3) tilting movement of the screws leading to bone resorption and loosening is avoided.…”