ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2023
Biomechanical evaluation of different sizes of 3D printed cage in lumbar interbody fusion-a finite element analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Biomechanical Effects of Two Types of 3D-Printed Prosthesis Reconstruction After Single-Segmental Total En Bloc Spondylectomy: A Finite Element Analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
- Biomechanical advances in oblique lateral lumbar interbody fusion using different interbody cages.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Review
- Effect of body mass index and disc degeneration on lumbar biomechanics after unilateral biportal endoscopy-unilateral laminectomy bilateral decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: a finite element study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the porosity and structural stability of 3D-printed porous titanium pedicle screws using finite element analysis.Biomedical engineering letters · 2026Article
- Article
- Subsidence reduction effect of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) with upper and lower open windows modified with lattice structure.Biomedical engineering letters · 2025Article
- Transforming spinal surgery with innovations in biologics and additive manufacturing.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion using a large polyetheretherketone cage: preliminary results.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
- The biomechanical effects of treating double-segment lumbar degenerative diseases with unilateral fixation through interlaminar fenestration interbody fusion surgery: a three-dimensional finite element study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Endotracheal intubation-related oral mucosal membrane pressure injuries: a narrative review of biomechanical insights, biomaterial optimization, and intelligent monitoring.Frontiers in medical technology · 2025Review
- Application of 3D printing technology in preoperative planning and treatment of proximal humerus fractures: a retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Effect of Cage Material and Size on Fusion Rate and Subsidence Following Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Neurospine · 2024Article
- Article
- Finite element biomechanical analysis of 3D printed intervertebral fusion cage in osteoporotic population.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Optimizing Spinal Fusion Cage Design to Improve Bone Substitute Filling on Varying Disc Heights: A 3D Printing Study.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo study the biomechanical characteristics of various tissue structures of different sizes of 3D printed Cage in lumbar interbody fusion.
methodsA finite element model of normal spine was reconstructed and verified. Pedicle screws and Cage of different sizes were implanted in the L4/5 segment to simulate lumbar interbody fusion. The range of motion of the fixed and cephalic adjacent segment, the stress of the screw-rod system, the stress at the interface between cage and L5 endplate, and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment were calculated and analyzed.
resultsThe range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of the adjacent segment of each postoperative model were larger than those of the intact model, but there was not much difference between them. The stress of cage-endplate interface was also larger than that of the intact model. However, the difference is that the stress of the endplate and the screw-rod system has a tendency to decrease with the increase of the axial area of cage.
conclusionsCage with larger axial area in lumbar interbody fusion can reduce the stress of internal fixation system and endplate, but will not increase the range of motion and intervertebral disc pressure of adjacent segment. It has a certain effect in preventing the cage subsidence, internal fixation system failure and screw rod fracture.
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.