ArticleScientific reports2025
Clinical application research on the titanium metal metatarsal prosthesis designed through FEA and manufactured by 3D printing.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Porosity optimization confers 3D-printed porous tantalum scaffolds with superior osteogenic capability and biocompatibility over titanium alloys.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
exploring the therapeutic efficacy of a 3D-printed multiple microporous titanium metatarsal and polyethylene sesamoid prosthesis based on finite element analysis. A patient with defect in the first metatarsal was enrolled. A digital model of the first metatarsal and medial cuneus prosthesis was designed from the contralateral images and the relevant anatomical parameters measured in the preoperative period (Model A). Model B was obtained by finite element analysis and iterative optimization of Model A. Model A and Model B designed with a microporous, an insertion structure for bone ingrowth and fusion, and a polyethylene sesamoid for limb weight-bearing. The object A and object B, made from titanium, were generated by 3D printing. The polyethylene sesamoid was manufactured by computerized numerical control technology. The prosthesis consist of object B and polyethylene sesamoid was implanted into the patient. The clinical parameters were evaluated. The maximum displacements of Model A and Model B were 0.031 mm and 0.019 mm. the deviation of the stress results was controlled within 5% between Model A and Model B. The object A with 63% weighed object B. There is significant difference for pressure in M1 and M5 area between bilateral foot. The AOFAS score was 48 before surgery and 88 after 15 months of surgery. The VAS score of before surgery, after 15 months of surgery and after 27 months of surgery was 7, 2 and 1, respectively. The lightweight and microporous design based on finite element analysis for metatarsal prosthesis, and manufactured by titanium and polyethylene can Reconstruct the arch.
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.