ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2023
Posterior Flange Cyclic Loading in a Novel Total Elbow Arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 2023. 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.
- Radiograph-Based Evaluation of Uncemented Humeral Hemiarthroplasty.Journal of hand surgery global online · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The goal of this study was to test the static and dynamic strength and loosening resistance of the posterior flange of a novel total elbow arthroplasty. We also examined the forces experienced by the ulnohumeral joint and the posterior olecranon during expected elbow use. Methods: Static stress analysis was performed for 3 flange sizes. Failure testing was conducted on 5 flanges (1 medium size and 4 small sizes). Loading occurred to reach 10,000 cycles. If this was accomplished, the cyclic load was increased until failure occurred. If failure occurred before 10,000 cycles, a lower force was employed. The safety factor for each implant size was calculated, and implant failure or loosening was observed. Results: Static testing revealed a safety factor of 6.6, 5.74, and 4.53 for the small, medium, and large flanges, respectively. The medium-sized flange completed 10,000 cycles with 1,000 N at 1 Hz, and then the force was increased until it failed at 23,000 cycles. Two small-sized flanges failed at 2,345 and 2,453 cycles, respectively, when loaded with 1,000 N. Two more small flanges were loaded with 729 N for 10,000 cycles, and then the cyclic load was continued until they failed at 17,000 and 17,340 cycles, respectively. No screw loosening was noted in any specimens. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that the posterior flange withstood static and dynamic forces greater than what is expected during in vivo use of a novel total elbow arthroplasty design. Static strength calculation and cyclic loading demonstrate that the medium-sized posterior flange is stronger than the small-sized posterior flange. Clinical Relevance: Ensuring that the ulnar body component and the posterior flange maintain secure connectivity with the polyethylene wear component may be beneficial to the proper function of a novel nonmechanically linked total elbow arthroplasty.
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.