Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38303025›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024

Biomechanical evaluation of the novel assembled internal fixed system in C2-C3 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a finite element analysis.

Hu Chen, Hao Sun, Lu Cao, Hong Xia, Qiang Tu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 38% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hu Chen *The First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China.
Hao Sun *Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, 510006, Guangdong, China.
Lu Cao *Department of Dermatology, People's Liberation Army General Hospital of Southern Theatre Command, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Hong XiaThe First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China. gzxiahong@126.com.
Qiang TuThe First School of Clinical Medicine, Southern Medical University, Guangzhou, 510515, Guangdong, China. tuqiang@126.com.
General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command · CNGuangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

Army Logistics Research Project of PLA CLB20J033the Science and Technology Planning Project of Guangzhou City 201904010349
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo analyze and compare the biomechanical characteristics of the new combined cervical fusion device (NCCFD) and the traditional cage-plate construct (CPC) to ascertain its effectiveness in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using finite element analysis.

methodsA finite element model of the cervical spine, inclusive of the occipital bone was created and validated. In the ACDF model, either CPC or NCCFD was implanted at the C2-C3 segment of the model. A pure moment of 1.0 Nm combined with a follower load of 50 N was directed onto the superior surfaces of the occipital bone to determine flexion, extension, lateral bending (left and right), and axial rotation (left and right). The range of motion (ROM), stress distribution at the bone-implant interface, and facet joint forces were investigated and compared between CPC and NCCFD systems.

resultThe results showed that the ROMs of the fused levels in both models were nearly zero, and the motions of the unfused segments were similar. In addition, the maximum displacement exhibited nearly identical values for both models. The maximum stress of NCCFD screws in lateral bending and rotational conditions is significantly higher than that of the CPC, while the NCCFD model's maximum stress remains within an acceptable range. Comparing the maximum fusion stress, it was found that the CPC experiences much lower fusion stress in anterior flexion and extension than the NCCFD, with no significant difference between the two in lateral bending and rotational states. Stress on the cage was mainly concentrated on both sides of the wings. Comparing the maximum IDP in the CPC and NCCFD, it was observed that maximum stresses rise in extension and lateral bending for both models. Lastly, stress distributions of the facet joints were generally similar across the two devices.

conclusionNCCFD not only provides the same level of biomechanical stability as CPC but also avoids postoperative complications associated with uneven force damage to the implant. The device offers a novel surgical alternative for ACDF in C2-C3 level.

Indexed as

DiskectomySpinal FusionBiomechanical PhenomenaBone PlatesCervical VertebraeFinite Element AnalysisRange of Motion, ArticularACDFBiomechanical evaluationCage-plate constructFinite element modelNew combined cervical fusion device

Identifiers

PMID38303025
PMCPMC10832244
OpenAlexW4391447969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.