ArticlePloS one2025
Finite element analysis of long SI screws in the treatment of vertically unstable bilateral sacral fractures.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Finite element analysis of sacral fixation strategies for fragility fractures of the pelvis.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe finite element analysis (FEA) was used to investigate the biomechanical stability of combined long SI screws in the treatment of bilateral sacral fractures.
methodsThis study was conducted between September 10, 2023, and June 13, 2024. Using the finite element (FE) method, a vertically unstable bilateral sacral fracture model and eight internal fixation groups were established: L1 (one long sacroiliac (SI) screw in S1), T1 (one transiliac-transsacral (TITS) screw in S1), 2S1 (two SI screws in S1 and S2), L1L2 (two long SI screws in S1 and S2), 2S1L2 (two SI screws in S1 and one long SI screw in S2), L1T2 (one long SI screw in S1 and one TITS screw in S2), T1T2 (two TITS screws in S1 and S2), and 2S1T2 (two SI screws in S1 and one TITS screw in S2). A pelvic standing posture was simulated to compare overall stiffness, average displacement along the fracture line, posterior rotation angle of the sacrum, and stress distribution in the SI joint among the models. In addition, stress nephograms of the eight internal fixations were analyzed.
resultsModels with smaller sacral displacement generally exhibited greater stiffness. Two-segment fixation constructs (T1T2, L1T2, 2S1T2, L1L2) provided better biomechanical stability than single-segment fixations (T1, 2S1, L1). The L1T2 group demonstrated stiffness comparable to T1T2 and superior stability to 2S1T2 when two segments were fixed. Peak stress was highest in the L1 group (211.9 MPa) and lowest in the T1T2 group (107.1 MPa), with all models remaining within the safe range of titanium alloy. The stress on implants was mainly concentrated at the SI joint-screw interface. Two-segment fixations showed lower peak stress and more uniform stress distribution, suggesting better load-sharing and reduced implant fatigue risk. Sacral retroversion angles followed the same ranking as peak stress at the SI joint, with T1T2, L1T2, and 2S1T2 groups showing the smallest angles, indicating superior rotational stability.
conclusionSI screws in dual-segment provide better biomechanical stability than those in the single-segment. Both the L1T2 and T1T2 groups demonstrate good biomechanical stability and are reliable for the fixation of vertically unstable bilateral sacral fractures. When a TITS screw cannot be inserted in the S1 segment, using a long SI screw in S1 combined with a TITS screw in S2 can achieve a comparable fixation effect.
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.