Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27585495›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2016

Curved Beam Computed Tomography based Structural Rigidity Analysis of Bones with Simulated Lytic Defect: A Comparative Study with Finite Element Analysis.

R Oftadeh, Z Karimi, J Villa-Camacho, E Tanck, N Verdonschot, R Goebel, B D Snyder, H N Hashemi, A Vaziri, A Nazarian

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Fracture risk assessment and clinical decision making for patients with metastatic bone disease.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2020
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

R OftadehCenter for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Z KarimiDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.
J Villa-CamachoCenter for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
E TanckOrthopaedic Research Laboratory, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
N VerdonschotOrthopaedic Research Laboratory, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
R GoebelSport Science Program, Qatar University, Doha 2713, Qatar.
B D SnyderCenter for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
H N HashemiDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.
A VaziriDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA.
A NazarianCenter for Advanced Orthopaedic Studies, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

NIAMS NIH HHS L30 AR056606
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper, a CT based structural rigidity analysis (CTRA) method that incorporates bone intrinsic local curvature is introduced to assess the compressive failure load of human femur with simulated lytic defects. The proposed CTRA is based on a three dimensional curved beam theory to obtain critical stresses within the human femur model. To test the proposed method, ten human cadaveric femurs with and without simulated defects were mechanically tested under axial compression to failure. Quantitative computed tomography images were acquired from the samples, and CTRA and finite element analysis were performed to obtain the failure load as well as rigidities in both straight and curved cross sections. Experimental results were compared to the results obtained from FEA and CTRA. The failure loads predicated by curved beam CTRA and FEA are in agreement with experimental results. The results also show that the proposed method is an efficient and reliable method to find both the location and magnitude of failure load. Moreover, the results show that the proposed curved CTRA outperforms the regular straight beam CTRA, which ignores the bone intrinsic curvature and can be used as a useful tool in clinical practices.

Indexed as

Compressive StrengthFinite Element AnalysisWeight-BearingAgedAged, 80 and overAutopsyBiomechanical PhenomenaFemurHardnessHardness TestsHumansImage Interpretation, Computer-AssistedMaleStress, MechanicalTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID27585495
PMCPMC5009360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.