ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Finite element analysis of modified pedicle screw fixation and traditional lumbopelvic fixation for the treatment of sacroiliac joint disruption.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical differences between occipital plate and modified C1 lateral mass screw in the treatment of complex craniocervical malformations: a finite element analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Biomechanical and clinical analysis of pelvic stability and the role of internal fixation after debridement for sacroiliac joint tuberculosis with different degrees of bone destruction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Investigating biomechanical differences in lumbosacral transitional vertebrae among different Castellvi classifications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe modified pedicle screw fixation (PSF) was designed to simulate an integrated framework structure to ameliorate the resistance to vertical and shearing forces of the disrupted sacroiliac complex, and the aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical characteristics of PSF and traditional lumbopelvic fixation (LPF) for the treatment of sacroiliac joint disruption.
methodsThe digital computer simulation model of an intact spine-pelvis-femur complex with main ligaments was built from clinical images. A left sacroiliac joint disruption model was mimicked by removing the concerned ligaments. After model validation, the two fixation models (modified PSF and traditional LPF) were established, and assembled with the disruption model. Under five loading scenarios (compression, flexion, extension, right bending, and left twisting), the finite element simulation was implemented. The maximum von Mises stress (VMS) of internal fixations and pelvises, maximum deformations on the Z-, Y-, X-axes and overall deformation of the sacrum were evaluated and compared.
resultsUnder all loading conditions, the maximum VMS of internal fixations and pelvises in the modified PSF model were lower than those in the traditional LPF model. Under flexion, right bending, and left twisting, the maximum Z-axis deformation of the sacrum for the modified PSF model was smaller than that of the traditional LPF model. For compression, the maximum Y-axis deformation of the sacrum was smaller than that of the traditional LPF model. During various loading modes, the maximum X-axis, and overall deformations of the sacrum for the modified PSF model were smaller than those in the traditional LPF model.
conclusionsCompared with the traditional LPF, the modified PSF shows superior biomechanical stability, with satisfied resistance to vertical and shearing forces, which might be potentially suitable for treating 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.