ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022
Biomechanical Comparison of WE43-Based Magnesium vs. Titanium Miniplates in a Mandible Fracture Model in Sheep.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Latest research progress of rare earth-magnesium alloys in orthopedics].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2025Review
- Biomechanical comparison of the efficacy of Cfr-PEEK and titanium systems in the fixation following sagittal split advancement osteotomy: a biomechanical study.BMC oral health · 2025Article
- Biomechanical analysis of a magnesium plantar plate prototype system for the first tarsometatarsal joint fusion: a cadaveric study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Titanium vs PEO Surface-Modified Magnesium Plate Fixation in a Mandible Bone Healing Model in Sheep.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2024Article
- Magnesium-based alloys with adapted interfaces for bone implants and tissue engineering.Regenerative biomaterials · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In fractures of the mandible, osteosynthesis with titanium plates is considered the gold standard. Titanium is an established and reliable material, its main disadvantages being metal artefacts and the need for removal in case of osteosynthesis complications. Magnesium, as a resorbable material with an elastic modulus close to cortical bone, offers a resorbable alternative osteosynthesis material, yet mechanical studies in mandible fracture fixation are still missing. The hypothesis of this study was that magnesium miniplates show no significant difference in the mechanical integrity provided for fracture fixation in mandible fractures under load-sharing indications. In a non-inferiority test, a continuous load was applied to a sheep mandible fracture model with osteosynthesis using either titanium miniplates of 1.0 mm thickness (Ti1.0), magnesium plates of 1.75 mm (Mg1.75), or magnesium plates of 1.5 mm thickness (Mg1.5). No significant difference (p > 0.05) was found in the peak force at failure, stiffness, or force at vertical displacement of 1.0 mm between Mg1.75, Mg1.5, and Ti1.0. This study shows the non-inferiority of WE43 magnesium miniplates compared to the clinical gold standard titanium miniplates.
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.