ArticleScientific reports2025
Predicting surgical outcomes in spring assisted cranioplasty via finite element analysis and animal experiments.
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 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.
- Spring-mediated cranioplasty for scaphocephaly: techniques and outcomes.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2026Article
- Definitive reconstruction of frontal asymmetry in an adolescent with anterior plagiocephaly due to unilateral coronal craniosynostosis using a hybrid osteo-titanium technology based on an individualized approach: A case report.Surgical neurology international · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sagittal craniosynostosis, a congenital cranial suture disorder, is treated with spring-assisted cranioplasty (SAC), but optimal surgical parameters remain unclear. This study explores computational models to predict surgical outcomes of SAC by linking biomechanics with bone regeneration and cranial remodeling. Fifteen 3-week-old Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats underwent SAC with nickel-titanium springs (0-100 g forces). Bone regeneration was tracked via fluorescence labeling, while micro-CT scans measured cephalic index (CI), bone mineral density (BMD), and bone volume fraction (BV/TV). Finite element analysis (FEA) simulated stress and strain distributions. Regression models were established to predict the relationship between mechanical indicators and surgical outcomes. The 50 g group achieved optimal bone regeneration and cranial correction, while > 80 g forces risked bone damage. FEA indicates stress and strain over the bone are influenced by spring force, rat geometry, and bone density. Regression analysis revealed linear strain-CI relationships and quadratic strain-BV/TV and strain-BMD relationship. Moderate spring force (50 g) or strain (1.0%) enhances osteogenesis without structural compromise. Computational models provide a biomechanically grounded framework for SAC optimization, advancing precision treatment for sagittal craniosynostosis. Future studies should validate findings in disease-specific models and assess long-term outcomes.
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.