Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35721863›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Mechanical Distribution and New Bone Regeneration After Implanting 3D Printed Prostheses for Repairing Metaphyseal Bone Defects: A Finite Element Analysis and Prospective Clinical Study.

Bingchuan Liu, Xingcai Li, Weipeng Qiu, Zhongjun Liu, Fang Zhou, Yufeng Zheng, Peng Wen, Yun Tian

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Finite element analysis of patient-specific additive-manufactured implants.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Bingchuan LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xingcai LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Weipeng QiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Zhongjun LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Fang ZhouDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Yufeng ZhengSchool of Materials Science and Engineering, Peking University, Beijing, China.
Peng WenDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Yun TianDepartment of Orthopaedics, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China.
Peking University Third Hospital · CNPeking University · CNTsinghua University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Critical metaphyseal bone defects caused by nonunion and osteomyelitis are intractable to repair in clinical practice owing to the rigorous demanding of structure and performance. Compared with traditional treatment methods, 3D printing of customized porous titanium alloy prostheses offer feasible and safe opportunities in repairing such bone defects. Yet, so far, no standard guidelines for optimal 3D printed prostheses design and fixation mode have been proposed to further promote prosthesis stability as well as ensure the continuous growth of new bone. In this study, we used a finite element analysis (FEA) to explore the biomechanical distribution and observed new bone regeneration in clinical practice after implanting 3D printed prostheses for repairing metaphyseal bone defects. The results reflected that different fixation modes could result in diverse prosthesis mechanical conductions. If an intramedullary (IM) nail was applied, the stress mainly conducted equally along the nail instead of bone and prosthesis structure. While the stress would transfer more to the lateral bone and prosthesis's body when the printed wing and screws are selected to accomplish fixation. All these fixation modes could guarantee the initial and long-term stability of the implanted prosthesis, but new bone regenerated with varying degrees under special biomechanical environments. The fixation mode of IM nail was more conducive to new bone regeneration and remodeling, which conformed to the Wolff's law. Nevertheless, when the prosthesis was fixed by screws alone, no dense new callus could be observed. This fixation mode was optional for defects extremely close to the articular surface. In conclusion, our innovative study could provide valuable references for the fixation mode selection of 3D printed prosthesis to repair metaphyseal bone defect.

Indexed as

3D printing technologyclinical studyfinite element analysismetaphyseal bone defectnew bone regeneration

Identifiers

PMID35721863
PMCPMC9204204
OpenAlexW4281945767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.