ArticleScientific reports2025
Atmospheric and submerged bone cement erosion by a pulsating water jet with a straight tubular nozzle extension.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A pulsating water jet (PWJ) offers advantages over a continuous water jet, such as lower liquid volume flows and pressures for deeper cuts. However, traditional PWJ setups are unsuitable for minimally invasive surgeries due to their size. This study aimed to develop a PWJ instrument by testing a 100 mm long, 10 mm diameter extension tube. We evaluated (1) the machining capability of the PWJ with the extension tube on simulated hard tissue and (2) the impact of a submerged environment on cutting capacity. Using a 20 kHz ultrasonic pulsating water jet were provided erosion 120 tests in bone cement and assessed cutting depth and volume via micro-CT scans. Results showed that the PWJ with the extension tube could machine bone cement in both open-air and submerged environments, though the latter required longer exposure and reduced material removal by 65%. Increasing exposure time improved cutting depth and volume until a plateau was reached. The PWJ was compared with a continuous jet with a 5-minute exposure time, showing no visible or measurable erosion. This PWJ design could meet requirements, offering non-thermal and selective tissue removal.
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.