Lin et al, VCOT 2025
- ceejaywood
- May 22
- 1 min read
To compare the exposure of the canine radius (surface area, length, and width) between the craniolateral approach (CLA) and the craniomedial approach (CMA)
A latex template was laid over the exposed bone after completion of the approach to ensure the accuracy of exposed bone measurement. The width was measured at 6.25% intervals of the total length of template
There was no statistically significant difference in the length of the exposed radius: 12.9 ± 1.4 cm for CLA vs. 11.4 ± 2.8 cm for CMA (p = 0.08).
CLA exposed a significantly larger surface area of the radius than CMA with average areas of 19.4 ± 4.7 cm² for CLA and 13.8 ± 3.2 cm² for CMA (p = 0.01).
At P2, CLA had a significantly greater width (1.39 ± 0.31 cm) compared to CMA (1.16 ± 0.21 cm) with p = 0.016. Other proximal widths were not statistically different. The remaining width measurements were not statistically significant between CMA and CLA
