ArticleEplasty2022
Hardness of Artificial Bone and Vulnerability of Reconstructed Skull-A Biomechanical Study.
Article in Eplasty, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Various materials are used to reconstruct cranial defects. The present study focuses on what happens when reconstructed skulls are impacted in trauma situations. Using biomechanical analysis, the present study elucidates how the hardness of reconstruction material affects the vulnerability of reconstructed skulls. Methods: A 3-dimensional finite element model was produced simulating the skull of an intact adult male. A defect was made on the left hemi-frontal part of the skull model. The defect was restored with artificial bone with 3 different hardness models. These models were respectively defined as Hard Model (simulating reconstruction with titanium), Moderate Model (simulating reconstruction with a material equivalent to human bone), and Soft Model (simulating reconstruction with hydroxyl apatite). Virtual impacts were applied on these models in 9 patterns, and the conditions of subsequent fracture were evaluated using finite element analysis. For each of the 9 impact patterns, the conditions of subsequent fracture were compared among the 3 models. Results: In 8 of the 9 impact patterns, the condition of fracture was more widespread for Hard Model than for Moderate Model and Soft Model. Conclusions: Skulls reconstructed with a hard material can develop serious fracture if they are impacted again. Therefore, usage of hard materials should be avoided to prevent serious injuries from secondary trauma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37035411PMC10078552W4363646161What 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.