ArticleInternational wound journal2024
Influence of the biomechanical evaluation of rupture using two shapes of same intramedullary implant after proximal interphalangeal joint arthrodesis to correct the claw/hammer pathology: A finite element study.
Article in International wound journal, 2024. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We used finite element analysis to study the mechanical stress distribution of a new intramedullary implant used for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) arthrodesis (PIPJA) to surgically correct the claw-hammer toe deformity that affects 20% of the population. After geometric reconstruction of the foot skeleton from claw toe images of a 36-year-old male patient, two implants were positioned, in the virtual model, one neutral implant (NI) and another one 10° angled (10°AI) within the PIPJ of the second through fourth HT during the toe-off phase of gait and results were compared to those derived for the non-surgical foot (NSF). A PIPJA was performed on the second toe using a NI reduced tensile stress at the proximal phalanx (PP) (45.83 MPa) compared to the NSF (59.44 MPa; p < 0.001). When using the 10°AI, the tensile stress was much higher at PP and middle phalanges (MP) of the same toe, measuring 147.58 and 160.58 MPa, respectively, versus 59.44 and 74.95 MPa at corresponding joints in the NSF (all p < 0.001). Similar results were found for compressive stresses. The NI reduced compressive stress at the second PP (-65.12 MPa) compared to the NSF (-113.23 MPa) and the 10°AI (-142 MPa) (all p < 0.001). The von Mises stresses within the implant were also significantly lower when using NI versus 10°AI (p < 0.001). Therefore, we do not recommend performing a PIPJA using the 10°AI due to the increase in stress concentration primarily at the second PP and MP, which could promote implant breakage.
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.