ArticleActa cirurgica brasileira2021
Biomechanical evaluation of a new femoral stem design for total hip replacement in a canine model.
Article in Acta cirurgica brasileira, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A meta-analysis comparing the effects of cemented and uncemented prostheses on wound infection and pain in patients with femoral neck fractures.International wound journal · 2023Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the biomechanical properties of a novel total hip replacement femoral stem.
methodsEight pairs of femurs from dog cadavers were used. The femurs were separated into different groups. A novel femoral stem with a convex proximal portion (Stem B) was biomechanically evaluated and compared to awell-known veterinary collared stem (Stem A). Femoral stems were inserted into the contralateral femurs from the same dog, forming 16 constructs. A flexo-compression load was applied on the axial axis of each sample. Maximum strength, deflection, stiffness, and energy absorption were analysed.
resultsGroup B constructs showed significantly higher values (p ? 0.05) for the variables, except stiffness. The mean maximum strength was 1,347 ± 357 N for Group A and 1,805 ± 123 N for Group B (p ? 0.0069). The mean deflection was5.54 ± 2.63 mm for Group A and 10.03 ± 3.99 mm for Group B (p ? 0.0056). For the energy variable, the force was 6,203 ± 3,488 N/mm for Group A and 12,885 ± 5,056 N/mm for Group B (p ? 0.0054). Stem B had greater maximum strength, deflection, and energy.
conclusionsThe new stem was effective in neutralizing the impact of axial flexion-compression stresses during biomechanical tests in cadaveric models.
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.