ArticleComparative medicine2015
Four-point bending as a method for quantitatively evaluating spinal arthrodesis in a rat model.
Article in Comparative medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of insulin dependent diabetes on bone metabolism and growth after spinal fusion.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2020Article
- Bone and Cartilage Interfaces With Orthopedic Implants: A Literature Review.Frontiers in surgery · 2020Review
- Comparative Efficacy of Commonly Available Human Bone Graft Substitutes as Tested for Posterolateral Fusion in an Athymic Rat Model.International journal of spine surgery · 2019Article
- Effect of modulating dietary vitamin D on the general bone health of rats during posterolateral spinal fusion.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2018Article
- Rapid Osteogenic Enhancement of Stem Cells in Human Bone Marrow Using a Glycogen-Synthease-Kinase-3-Beta Inhibitor Improves Osteogenic Efficacy In Vitro and In Vivo.Stem cells translational medicine · 2018Article
- Effect of local zoledronic acid administration in a rat model of posterolateral spinal fusion.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
- Electrospun, synthetic bone void filler promotes human MSC function and BMP-2 mediated spinal fusion.Journal of biomaterials applicationsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The most common method of evaluating the success (or failure) of rat spinal fusion procedures is manual palpation testing. Whereas manual palpation provides only a subjective binary answer (fused or not fused) regarding the success of a fusion surgery, mechanical testing can provide more quantitative data by assessing variations in strength among treatment groups. We here describe a mechanical testing method to quantitatively assess single-level spinal fusion in a rat model, to improve on the binary and subjective nature of manual palpation as an end point for fusion-related studies. We tested explanted lumbar segments from Sprague-Dawley rat spines after single-level posterolateral fusion procedures at L4-L5. Segments were classified as 'not fused,' 'restricted motion,' or 'fused' by using manual palpation testing. After thorough dissection and potting of the spine, 4-point bending in flexion then was applied to the L4-L5 motion segment, and stiffness was measured as the slope of the moment-displacement curve. Results demonstrated statistically significant differences in stiffness among all groups, which were consistent with preliminary grading according to manual palpation. In addition, the 4-point bending results provided quantitative information regarding the quality of the bony union formed and therefore enabled the comparison of fused specimens. Our results demonstrate that 4-point bending is a simple, reliable, and effective way to describe and compare results among rat spines after fusion surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25730756PMC4396928W66974405What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.