ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022
Finite element analysis of intraosseous distal radioulnar joint prosthesis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of different ulnar osteotomies on loading of the distal radioulnar joint: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- [Three-dimensional finite element model construction and biomechanical analysis of customized titanium alloy lunate prosthesis].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundJoint replacement is one of the options to retrieve the interosseous distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) function. DRUJ prosthesis has recently been introduced clinically to treat DRUJ instability. This article analyzes the biomechanical behavior of the prosthesis during different loadings by the finite element method.
methodsCT images of a healthy 33 years old man were used to construct the three-dimensional geometry of the forearm bone. Then two models, a healthy foreman (Model A) and a damaged model with an inserted interosseous prosthesis (Model B), were constructed to analyze and compare the foreman's biomechanical behavior under different loading conditions using the finite element method. Both models were examined during pronation and supination with 500, 1000, 2000, and 5000 N.mm values. Also, both models were subjected to volar and dorsal loads with values of 10, 30, and 50 N and traction force with 100, 150, and 200 N.
resultsMaximum and minimum principal stresses were evaluated for bones in all conditions, and von Mises stress was considered for the prosthesis and fixing screws. In supination, the maximum stress in Model A is significantly higher than the Model B. However, the maximum principal stress of both models is similar during volar and dorsal loading. In Model A, the maximum principal stress in traction is much smaller than in Model B. The absolute value of minimum principal stress in pronation and supination in Model B is higher than in Model A. The prostheses and screws are subjected to higher stresses during pronation than supination. Also, the amount of stress created in prostheses and screws during volar and dorsal loading is almost equal. In traction loading, screws are subjected to significantly high stresses.
conclusionOur study indicates that the interosseous DRUJ prosthesis can perform the foreman's normal daily activities. This prosthesis provides the ability similar to a normal hand. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.