Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35655738›Full record

ArticleThe archives of bone and joint surgery2022

Replacement of Destructive Pull-out Test with Modal Analysis in Primary Fixation Stability Assessment of Spinal Pedicle Screw.

Mohammadjavad Einafshar, Ata Hashemi, Gerrit Harry van Lenthe

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The archives of bone and joint surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mohammadjavad EinafsharBiomechanical Engineering Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, Iran.
Ata HashemiBiomechanical Engineering Group, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Hafez Avenue, Tehran, Iran.
Gerrit Harry van LentheBiomechanics Section, KU Leuven- University of Leuven, Celestijnenlaan, Leuven, Belgium.
Amirkabir University of Technology · IRKU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pedicle screw fixation devices are the predominant stabilization systems adopted for a wide variety of spinal defects. Accordingly, both pedicle screw design and bone quality are known as the main parameters affecting the fixation strength as measured by the pull-out force and insertion torque. The pull-out test method, which is recommended by the standards of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), is destructive. A non-destructive test method was proposed to evaluate the mechanical stability of the pedicle screw using modal analysis. Natural frequency (ω Methods: Cylindrical pedicle screws with a conical core were inserted into two different polyurethane (PU) foams with densities of 0.16 and 0.32 g/cm3. The PIT and PPF were measured according to the well-established ASTM-F543 standard at three different insertion depths of 10, 20, and 30 mm. Modal analysis was carried out through recording time response of an accelerometer attached to the head of the screw impacted by a shock hammer. The effect of the insertion depth and foam density on the insertion torque, natural frequency, and pull-out force were quantified. Results: The maximum values of ω Conclusion: The modal analysis was found to be a reliable, repeatable, and non-destructive method, which could be considered a prospective alternative to the destructive pull-out test that is limited to

Indexed as

Bone screw fixationInsertion torqueNon-destructive modal analysisPolyurethane foamPrimary stabilityPull-out strength

Identifiers

PMID35655738
PMCPMC9117904
OpenAlexW3190510663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.