ArticlePloS one2015
Mechanical properties of calvarial bones in a mouse model for craniosynostosis.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of bone-specific material properties on finite element modelling of the skull.Royal Society open science · 2026Article
- Regional variability in craniofacial stiffness: a study in normal and Crouzon mice during postnatal development.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Cranial bone microarchitecture in a mouse model for syndromic craniosynostosis.Journal of anatomy · 2024Article
- Regional variation of the cortical and trabecular bone material properties in the rabbit skull.PloS one · 2024Article
- Form-function relationships underlie rapid dietary changes in a lizard.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- A preliminary analysis of replicating the biomechanics of helmet therapy for sagittal craniosynostosis.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2023Article
- Mechanical loading of cranial joints minimizes the craniofacial phenotype in Crouzon syndrome.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Application of nanoindentation technology in testing the mechanical properties of skull materials.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Computational Framework to Predict Calvarial Growth: Optimising Management of Sagittal Craniosynostosis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Predicting and comparing three corrective techniques for sagittal craniosynostosis.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Using Sensitivity Analysis to Develop a Validated Computational Model of Post-operative Calvarial Growth in Sagittal Craniosynostosis.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Article
- Predicting calvarial morphology in sagittal craniosynostosis.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- An Overview of Modelling Craniosynostosis Using the Finite Element Method.Molecular syndromology · 2019Review
- Predicting calvarial growth in normal and craniosynostotic mice using a computational approach.Journal of anatomy · 2018Article
- Cell Mechanics of Craniosynostosis.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2017Article
- Modelling human skull growth: a validated computational model.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mammalian cranial vault largely consists of five flat bones that are joined together along their edges by soft fibrous tissues called sutures. Premature closure of the cranial sutures, craniosynostosis, can lead to serious clinical pathology unless there is surgical intervention. Research into the genetic basis of the disease has led to the development of various animal models that display this condition, e.g. mutant type Fgfr2C342Y/+ mice which display early fusion of the coronal suture (joining the parietal and frontal bones). However, whether the biomechanical properties of the mutant and wild type bones are affected has not been investigated before. Therefore, nanoindentation was used to compare the elastic modulus of cranial bone and sutures in wild type (WT) and Fgfr2C342Y/+mutant type (MT) mice during their postnatal development. Further, the variations in properties with indentation position and plane were assessed. No difference was observed in the elastic modulus of parietal bone between the WT and MT mice at postnatal (P) day 10 and 20. However, the modulus of frontal bone in the MT group was lower than the WT group at both P10 (1.39±0.30 vs. 5.32±0.68 GPa; p<0.05) and P20 (5.57±0.33 vs. 7.14±0.79 GPa; p<0.05). A wide range of values was measured along the coronal sutures for both the WT and MT samples, with no significant difference between the two groups. Findings of this study suggest that the inherent mechanical properties of the frontal bone in the mutant mice were different to the wild type mice from the same genetic background. These differences may reflect variations in the degree of biomechanical adaptation during skull growth, which could have implications for the surgical management of craniosynostosis patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.