ArticlePloS one2020
Drill holes decrease cancellous bone strength: A comparative study of 33 paired osteoporotic human and 9 paired artificial bone samples.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in internal fixation methods for intertrochanteric femoral fractures: A narrative review.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
- Targeted epiphysiodesis using needle arthroscopy.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Article
- Compressive and tensile properties of polyurethane foam mimicking trabecular tissue in artificial femoral head bones.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study was designed to compare compressive strength of cancellous bone retrieved from the femoral head in a specimen with and without guide wire hole, with comparison to synthetic bone samples. Femoral heads retrieved from 33 patients who sustained femoral neck fractures and underwent hip arthroplasty were cut into cuboids leaving two matching samples from the same femoral head. Similar samples were prepared from synthetic femurs. One of the matching samples was chosen at random and was drilled with a guide wire for cancellous screws. The uniaxial compression tests of bone blocks were carried out using the Zwick-Roell Z020 strength testing machine. The mean loss of sample cross section area due to drilling was 24%. The force at failure in drilled specimens was significantly smaller by 18% in human (median: 26%) and by 25% in synthetic bone (median 27%). The strength of human specimens was almost 2 times greater, and their stiffness nearly 4 times greater than in synthetic samples. The study shows that the weakening of the bone after drilling is roughly proportional to the loss of sample cross section area. The percentage decrease in strength was similar in human and artificial bone, but human samples were stronger and stiffer. The comparison shows that forces measured in biomechanical studies on artificial bone cannot be directly attributed to humans, but the relative differences in mechanical properties of synthetic samples after some damage may be accurate and resemble that of human bones.
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.