Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38434291›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Biomechanical study of different bone cement distribution on osteoporotic vertebral compression Fracture-A finite element analysis.

Chengqiang Zhou, Xiao Meng, Shaolong Huang, Han Chen, Haibin Zhou, Yifeng Liao, Zhongjian Tang, Xu Zhang, Hua Li, Wei Sun and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chengqiang ZhouDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Xiao MengDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Shaolong HuangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Han ChenDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Haibin ZhouDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Yifeng LiaoDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Zhongjian TangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Xu ZhangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Hua LiDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Wei SunDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Yunqing WangDepartment of Spine Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University, Xuzhou, Jiangsu, China.
Xuzhou Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the biomechanical effects of different bone cement distribution methods on osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCF). Patients and methods: Raw CT data from a healthy male volunteer was used to create a finite element model of the T12-L2 vertebra using finite element software. A compression fracture was simulated in the L1 vertebra, and two forms of bone cement dispersion (integration group, IG, and separation group, SG) were also simulated. Six types of loading (flexion, extension, left/right bending, and left/right rotation) were applied to the models, and the stress distribution in the vertebra and intervertebral discs was observed. Additionally, the maximum displacement of the L1 vertebra was evaluated. Results: Bone cement injection significantly reduced stress following L1 vertebral fractures. In the L1 vertebral body, the maximum stress of SG was lower than that of IG during flexion, left/right bending, and left/right rotation. In the T12 vertebral body, compared with IG, the maximum stress of SG decreased during flexion and right rotation. In the L2 vertebral body, the maximum stress of SG was the lowest under all loading conditions. In the T12-L1 intervertebral disc, compared with IG, the maximum stress of SG decreased during flexion, extension, and left/right bending and was basically the same during left/right rotation. However, in the L1-L2 intervertebral discs, the maximum stress of SG increased during left/right rotation compared with that of IG. Furthermore, the maximum displacement of SG was smaller than that of IG in the L1 vertebral bodies under all loading conditions. Conclusions: SG can reduce the maximum stress in the vertebra and intervertebral discs, offering better biomechanical performance and improved stability than IG.

Indexed as

BiomechanicsBone cement distributionCompression fractureFinite element analysisOsteoporosisVertebroplasty

Identifiers

PMID38434291
PMCPMC10907677
OpenAlexW4392055326

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.