ArticlePloS one2021
A novel approach to evaluate the effects of artificial bone focal lesion on the three-dimensional strain distributions within the vertebral body.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- How to Study the Mechanobiology of Intestinal Epithelial Organoids? A Review of Culture Supports, Imaging Techniques, and Analysis Methods.Biology of the cell · 2025Review
- Microstructure of the human metastatic vertebral body.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Bone metastases do not affect the measurement uncertainties of a global digital volume correlation algorithm.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Osteolytic vs. Osteoblastic Metastatic Lesion: Computational Modeling of the Mechanical Behavior in the Human Vertebra after Screws Fixation Procedure.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Digital volume correlation for the characterization of musculoskeletal tissues: Current challenges and future developments.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Biomechanical influence of T1 tilt alteration on adjacent segments after anterior cervical fusion.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The spine is the first site for incidence of bone metastasis. Thus, the vertebrae have a high potential risk of being weakened by metastatic tissues. The evaluation of strength of the bone affected by the presence of metastases is fundamental to assess the fracture risk. This work proposes a robust method to evaluate the variations of strain distributions due to artificial lesions within the vertebral body, based on in situ mechanical testing and digital volume correlation. Five porcine vertebrae were tested in compression up to 6500N inside a micro computed tomography scanner. For each specimen, images were acquired before and after the application of the load, before and after the introduction of the artificial lesions. Principal strains were computed within the bone by means of digital volume correlation (DVC). All intact specimens showed a consistent strain distribution, with peak minimum principal strain in the range -1.8% to -0.7% in the middle of the vertebra, demonstrating the robustness of the method. Similar distributions of strains were found for the intact vertebrae in the different regions. The artificial lesion generally doubled the strain in the middle portion of the specimen, probably due to stress concentrations close to the defect. In conclusion, a robust method to evaluate the redistribution of the strain due to artificial lesions within the vertebral body was developed and will be used in the future to improve current clinical assessment of fracture risk in metastatic spines.
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.