ArticleActa orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica2024
Comparison of mechanical stability of modified pedicle screw fixator and unilateral lumbopelvic fixation for treating sacroiliac joint disruption: A finite element analysis study.
Article in Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Objective: This study aimed to investigate the mechanical stability of a modified pedicle screw fixator and compare it with unilateral lumbopelvic fixation for treating sacroiliac joint disruption using finite element simulation technology. Methods: The digital model of a normal spine-pelvis-femur containing the main pelvic and lumbar ligaments was established based on computed tomography images. A sacroiliac joint disruption model was built and validated, which was stabilized with the models of a modified pedicle screw fixator or unilateral lumbopelvic fixation. A 400 N follower loading was applied to the lumbar vertebrae for the 2 fixation models to analyze displacement and stress distribution. In addition, the construct stiffness was calculated. Results: The peak amounts of sacral vertical displacement, horizontal displacement, posterior displacement, and overall displacement were 0.70 mm, 0.17 mm, 0.73 mm, and 0.88 mm, respectively, in the modified pedicle screw fixator model, which were less than those in the unilateral lumbopelvic fixation model (1.17 mm, 0.31 mm, 2.21 mm, and 2.29 mm, respectively). Compared with unilateral lumbopelvic fixation, the percentage decreases of the modified pedicle screw fixators were 40.2%, 45.2%, 67.0%, and 61.6%, respectively. The peak stress of the internal fixation and pelvis in the modified pedicle screw fixator model was 351.23 MPa and 39.91 MPa, which has 15.5% and 70.4% lower than in the unilateral lumbopelvic fixation model. The construct stiffness of the modified pedicle screw fixator (571 N/ mm) was 67% better than that of unilateral lumbopelvic fixation (342 N/mm). Conclusion: The finite element simulation results showed that the modified pedicle screw fixator model demonstrated smaller sacral displacement, fewer stresses on the internal fixation and bone, and higher construct stiffness compared with the unilateral lumbopelvic fixation model. Thus, the modified pedicle screw fixator may provide biomechanical advantages over unilateral lumbopelvic fixation in the treatment of sacroiliac joint disruption.
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.