ArticleScientific reports2025
A non-metallic PEEK topology optimization reconstruction implant for large mandibular continuity defects, validated using the MANDYBILATOR apparatus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- PEEK in modern maxillofacial surgery: clinical applications, limitations and future opportunities.British dental journal · 2026Review
- Three-Dimensional Surgical Planning in Mandibular Cancer: A Decade of Clinical Experience and Outcomes.Cancers · 2026Article
- Predictive bite force modelling of head and neck oncology patients for clinical mandibular reconstruction applications.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Mandibular Implants: A Metamaterial-Based Approach to Reducing Stress Shielding.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Article
- Article
- Assessing the role of PEKK implant material on cytotoxicity, inflammatory response, and molecular interactions with pro-inflammatory cytokines: An in-vitro and in-silico study.Journal of oral biology and craniofacial researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In cases of large mandibular continuity defects resulting from malignancy resection, the current standard of care involves using patient-specific/custom titanium reconstruction plates along with autogenous grafts (fibula, scapula, or iliac crest segments). However, when grafts are not feasible or desired, only the reconstruction plate is used to bridge the gap. Unfortunately, metal osteosynthesis and reconstruction plates, including titanium, exhibit adverse effects such as stress-shielding and limitations in accurate postoperative irradiation (especially with proton-beam therapy). To address these issues, in this study we explore, develop and validate a non-metallic solution: a topology-optimized polyetheretherketone (PEEK) load-bearing implant for large non-grafted mandibular continuity defects. In order to thoroughly validate the developed PEEK reconstruction, a dedicated MANDYBILATOR testing apparatus was developed. Using the MANDYBILATOR finite element analysis results of the implant were confirmed and the PEEK implant was mechanically validated for both static and dynamic loading. Results show that the PEEK reconstructed mandible is comparably strong as the unreconstructed mandible and is unlikely to fail due to fatigue. Our PEEK implant design has the mechanical potential to act as a substitute for the current titanium plates used in the reconstruction of continuity defects of the mandible. This may potentially lead to optimised patient-specific reconstructions, with the implants matching the bone's stiffness and possessing radiolucent properties which are useful for radiographic follow-ups and radiotherapy. Furthermore, the addition of the dynamic/cyclic MANDYBILATOR apparatus allows for more realistic application of the in-vivo loading of the mandible and can provide added insights in biomechanical behaviour of the mandible.
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.