ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2019
Endplate Deformation Due to Open and Strutted Intervertebral Devices.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere is an absence of work on vertebral endplate response to peripheral loading following disc removal and interbody placement. Endplate deflection into the interbody space may impart beneficial strain on the developing fusion mass, influencing bone formation and remodeling. The aim of this study was to verify endplate deformation due to peripheral loading using a custom transducer and to investigate whether endplate motion is inhibited by implant design.
methodsA total of 14 porcine (L4, L5) vertebrae were assigned to open or strutted implant designs. A custom transducer was placed on the endplate while 500 N was applied to the implant at 1 Hz for 500 cycles. Endplate motion was acquired for each time point and averaged among specimens of the same design. The rates and magnitudes of endplate deformation were compared between implant designs using unpaired
resultsPeripheral loading of both implant designs resulted in endplate deflection into the interbody space. The open implant design demonstrated an increased rate and magnitude of endplate deformation when compared with strutted implants.
conclusionInterbody cage design directly influences the dynamic motion of the vertebral endplate during cyclic loading. A larger, faster deflection of the endplate could increase the strain rate, duration, and magnitude on the developing interbody fusion mass. These parameters of dynamic strain have been correlated with increased bone formation and remodeling. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Unimpeded endplate deformation in an open cage design could impart a strain pattern on the developing fusion mass that increases bone formation and remodeling, ultimately leading to a faster and stronger fusion.
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.