Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41267348›Full record

ArticleJournal of feline medicine and surgery2025

Biomechanical evaluation of three different fixation methods in tibial tuberosity transposition in cats.

Paul Schwarzmann, Brian Park, Moritz Irgang, Sebastian Knell, Franck Forterre

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of feline medicine and surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Paul SchwarzmannDivision of Small Animal Surgery, Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0009-0005-3320-7520
Brian ParkClinic for Small Animal Surgery, Department for Small Animals, Vetsuisse Faculty Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Moritz IrgangTierklinik Schwarzmann Rankweil OG, Rankweil, Austria.
Sebastian KnellClinic for Small Animal Surgery, Department for Small Animals, Vetsuisse Faculty Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Franck ForterreDivision of Small Animal Surgery, Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty Bern, Bern, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare three different fixation techniques for tibial tuberosity transposition (TTT) in cats in a non-cyclic load-to-failure model. The objective was to determine whether there was a significant difference between the maximum load at failure (MLF) and stiffness between a two-pin tension band wire construct (2PTBW), a two-pin construct with a maintained distal cortical attachment (2PDA) and a two-pin construct (2P), and to report the modes of failure of each group.MethodsTibiae from cat cadavers (n = 40) were allocated to one of four groups: 2PTBW, 2PDA, 2P and control (no surgery). The respective technique was performed on each tibia with a vertical alignment of the pins. Biomechanical testing was performed in a non-cyclic load-to-failure model; MLF, stiffness and mode of failure were recorded. Statistical analyses included one-way ANOVA and pairwise comparisons.ResultsThe 2P group had a significantly lower MLF than the 2PTBW, 2PDA and control groups (

Indexed as

TibiaAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaBone NailsCadaverCatsFemaleMalebiomechanical testingMedial patellar luxationorthopaedic surgerytibial tuberosity transposition

Identifiers

PMID41267348
PMCPMC12639201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.