ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2025
The 3D-Printed Customized Femoral Short Stem Offers Improved Anatomical Parameters Restoration, Fitness and Biomechanical Performance Compared With Traditional Femoral Stem.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe traditional femoral stem is unsuitable for patients with severe proximal femoral bone defects or deformities. However, 3D-printed customized designs offer improved proximal femoral canal contact and enhance the initial stability of the femoral prosthesis. Therefore, this study aims to compare the anatomical parameters, contact parameters, and performance of the 3D-printed customized femoral short (CFS) stem with those of the traditional femoral stem following total hip arthroplasty (THA).
methodsAn in vitro study simulating THA was performed using artificial femur models, with a 3D-printed CFS stem as the experimental group and a Trilock stem as the control group. Anatomical parameters, fitness, filling, micro-motion, and strain distribution were evaluated using artificial femoral models. Micro-motion and strain were recorded under different simulated bodyweight loading using a 3D digital image correlation measurement system.
resultsThe neck-shaft angles (NSA) and coronal femoral horizontal offset (CFHO) of the 3D-printed CFS stem (NSA: 125.22°, CFHO: 41.03 mm) were closer to those of the intact femur (NSA: 127.37°, CFHO: 43.27 mm) compare with the Trilock stem (NSA: 132.61°, CFHO: 32.98 mm). In addition, the 3D-printed CFS stem showed improved fitness at cross-sections (The top of the lesser trochanter: 6.31%, the middle of the lesser trochanter: 23.42%, the bottom of the lesser trochanter: 26.61%) and reduced micro-motion under different simulated bodyweight loads (1000: 0.043, 1375: 0.056, 2060 N: 0.061 mm).
conclusionsThe 3D-printed CFS stem provides improved restoration of anatomical parameters, enhanced fitness, and superior biomechanical performance compared with the Trilock stem.
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.