ArticleScientific reports2024
Finite-element analysis of different fixation types after Enneking II + III pelvic tumor resection.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Finite element biomechanical evaluation of a novel double-door screw-plate system for posterior cervical laminoplasty.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- The Reconstructive Pelvic Anatomy classification system : a valid and reliable classification system for pelvic reconstruction.Bone & joint open · 2026Article
- 3D-Printed Components for Cost-Effective Polarisation Sensing of Terahertz Radiation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Comparative study by FEM of different liners of a transfemoral amputated lower limb.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The current primary treatment approach for malignant pelvic tumors involves hemipelvic prosthesis reconstruction following tumor resection. In cases of Enneking type II + III pelvic tumors, the prosthesis necessitates fixation to the remaining iliac bone. Prevailing methods for prosthesis fixation include the saddle prosthesis, ice cream prosthesis, modular hemipelvic prosthesis, and personalized prosthetics using three-dimensional printing. To prevent failure of hemipelvic arthroplasty protheses, a novel fixation method was designed and finite element analysis was conducted. In clinical cases, the third and fourth sacral screws broke, a phenomenon also observed in the results of finite element analysis. Based on the original surgical model, designs were created for auxiliary dorsal iliac, auxiliary iliac bottom, auxiliary sacral screw, and auxiliary pubic ramus fixation. A nonlinear quasi-static finite element analysis was then performed under the maximum load of the gait cycle, and the results indicated that assisted sacral dorsal fixation significantly reduces stress on the sacral screws and relative micromotion exceeding 28 μm. The fixation of the pubic ramus further increased the initial stability of the prosthesis and its interface osseointegration ability. Therefore, for hemipelvic prostheses, incorporating pubic ramus support and iliac back fixation is advisable, as it provides new options for the application of hemipelvic tumor prostheses.
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.