ArticleScientific reports2025
Finite element analysis of mandibular fracture fixation authenticated by 3D printed mandible mechanical testing.
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 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 comparison of three-dimensional titanium and CFR-PEEK plates for mandibular subcondylar fracture fixation: a three-dimensional finite element analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Clinical and anatomical characteristics of mandibular angle fractures: a 10-year retrospective monocentric cohort study.Frontiers in oral health · 2026Article
- 3D printing and virtual planning in anterior mandibular fixation: A clinical study.Bioinformation · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Finite element analysis (FEA) for mandibular fracture fixation in craniomaxillofacial surgery remains promising but has been restricted due to the absence of an authenticated FEA model. This study aims to create an authenticated FEA model. This model was verified through a series of 3D printed mandible mechanical testing (3D-MMT) in a universal tensile machine using an indistinguishable set-up. Non-comminuted mandibular symphysis, parasymphysis, and angle fracture fixation stability were evaluated using a 2.0 mm 4-hole miniplate in three different plate configurations. Both FEA and 3D-MMT outcomes were reproducible and in agreement with the present understanding of stable mandibular fracture treatment. The results show favourable fracture stability with the dual plating, followed by the superior border, with the least stability observed in the inferior border plating. Furthermore, the FEA and the 3D-MMT outcomes were consistently similar, with a systematic 0.56 ± 0.12 mm total displacement difference (standard deviation). An excellent interclass relation coefficient (0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.96) was found between the FEA model and the 3D-MMT mechanical test, indicating that both results were consistent with each other. The authenticated FEA can accurately study the recognised biomechanical behaviour of non-comminuted mandibular fractures and shows a potential application for complex fracture fixation analysis.
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.