ArticleActa ortopedica brasileira
EVALUATION OF A BONE REINFORCEMENT TECHNIQUE USING FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS.
Article in Acta ortopedica brasileira. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- An analysis of different reconstruction techniques for the radius: a finite element analysis.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare the results of a simulated fall on the greater trochanter in the proximal portion of a synthetic femur before and after femoral reinforcement with tricalcium phosphate bone cement (TP) and polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), using finite element analysis (FEA).
methodsUsing two synthetic proximal femurs, a FEA simulating a fall on the greater trochanter was performed, using the Bi-directional Evolutionary Structural Optimization (BESO) program. For this analysis, the femurs were filled with TP and PMMA after perforations were created in the trochanteric region and neck. The results were compared with the strength values obtained from testing the control specimen, a synthetic bone without reinforcement.
resultsFEA showed a value of 600 N prior to reinforcement. After cementing with PMMA, the load increased by 57.5% (945 N), and by 53% (920 N) after cementing with TP.
conclusionSynthetic femurs gained resistance to fracture-causing forces in a simulated fall on the trochanter after bone reinforcement with PMMA and TP. Level of Evidence III; Experimental study.
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.