ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Predicting the effect of individual weight-bearing on tibial load and fracture healing after tibial plateau fractures-introduction of a biomechanical simulation model.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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.
- Kinesiophobia and knee biomechanical characteristics in patients with postoperative tibial plateau fractures across body mass index categories: a cross-sectional mediation analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The prescribed amount of weight-bearing after tibial plateau fractures is controversial because it affects osteosynthetic construct stability and fracture healing. We aim to introduce a simulation model that adequately predicts the effects of different weight-bearing amounts on stability and healing, based on the patient's individual fracture pattern and treatment construct. Methods: To safely test different amounts of weight-bearing limits, we first extracted knee joint forces for different weight-bearing limits from musculoskeletal simulation based on monitoring data of 22 uninjured participants. Correct loading was ensured with a force-measuring insole. We then tested three patients after tibial plateau fracture with their current weight-bearing level and constructed a simulation model determining implant stress, knee joint force, and fracture gap interfragmentary strain. The patient-specific weight-bearing level was then substituted for weight-normalized uninjured participant data to test different weight-bearing levels in the simulation model. Results: The simulation model calculated individual construct stiffness and interfragmentary strain at different weight-bearing levels following the clinical course. When comparing the patient's individual weight-bearing input with the weight-normalized input of the uninjured participants at the same level, comparable knee joint forces were extracted, showing the feasibility of this approach. Conclusion: Using an adapted reference movement database, the model allows the determination of safe weight-bearing ranges concerning construct stability and fracture healing based on individual fracture morphology and treatment without exposing patients to excessive weight-bearing. Future studies can test this approach in more extensive patient-number studies and different treatment situations.
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.