Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40690094›Full record

Article3D printing in medicine2025

Segmentation and finite element analysis in orthopaedic trauma.

Kevin Y Wang, Alexander R Farid, Simon Comtesse, Arvind G von Keudell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in 3D printing in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Three-Dimensional Printing in Pediatric Orthopaedics: Cost Analysis and Emerging Applications.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kevin Y WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Alexander R FaridDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Simon ComtesseInstitute for Biomechanics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Schweiz.
Arvind G von KeudellDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. avonkeudell@bwh.harvard.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFinite Element Analysis (FEA) has evolved into a crucial tool in orthopaedic trauma research and clinical practice. This review explores the broad applications of FEA in orthopedic surgery. MAIN BODY: FEA involves several steps, including geometry representation, segmentation, 3D rendering, meshing, material property assignment, defining boundary conditions, and specifying contact conditions. The process utilizes patient-specific volumetric data-computed tomography (CT) scan, for example-and aims for a balance between computational efficiency and accuracy. FEA provides valuable outcome measures such as stress distribution, strain quantification, fracture gap motion, failure prediction, and implant stability. These measures aid in evaluating fracture fixation techniques, implant design, and the impact of different fixation strategies. FEA has found applications in femur and proximal humerus fracture fixation, distal femur fracture planning, tibial plateau fractures, and post-traumatic osteoarthritis. It plays a pivotal role in predicting fracture risk, assessing construct stability, and informing surgical decision-making. Additionally, FEA facilitates the development of custom surgical planning and personalized implants. To enhance accuracy, FEA is combined with cadaveric biomechanical analysis, providing a reference-standard representation of in vivo kinematics. Future research should focus on refining FEA models through increased validation using cadaveric models and clinical data.

conclusionFEA has revolutionized orthopaedic trauma research by offering insights into biomechanics, fracture fixation, and implant design. Integration with cadaveric biomechanical analysis enhances accuracy. Further validation efforts and integration into regular clinical practice are essential for realizing FEA's full potential in individualized patient care. The combination of FEA and cadaveric analysis contributes to a comprehensive understanding of in vivo kinematics, ultimately improving patient outcomes.

Indexed as

BiomechanicsFEAFinite element analysisImplant designOrthopaedic trauma

Identifiers

PMID40690094
PMCPMC12278576

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.