ArticleScientific reports2025
CT/MRI-based finite element model construction and biomechanical analysis of acetabular quadrilateral fractures.
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.
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
Abstract
The study aims to construct a representative acetabular quadrilateral fracture model and compare the biomechanical performance of three internal fixation techniques. CT data from 70 fractures were analyzed to create fracture line mappings. A finite element model incorporating ligaments, cartilage, and fracture lines was developed using CT/MRI data from a healthy volunteer. Five loading conditions (standing, supine, lateral lying, sitting, femoroacetabular impingement) were simulated. Four groups were compared: unfixed (Group A), posterior column screw fixation (Group B), quadrilateral buttress screws fixation (Group C), and combined posterior column and quadrilateral buttress screws fixation (Group D). The most frequent fractures were both-column and anterior wall fractures. Fracture line displacement under standing conditions was Group A > Group B > Group C > Group D. In other conditions, the trend was Group A > Group C > Group B > Group D. Peak stress on posterior column screws occurred in the supine position for Group D, while Group B had greater stress in other conditions. Quadrilateral buttress screws showed peak stress in lateral lying for Group D, but Group C had greater stress in other conditions. The highest stress among cortical screws fixed via plates occurred in the posterior screws. Combined posterior column and quadrilateral buttress screws fixation may provide superior mechanical stability and could be considered as a preferred option for clinical fixation of acetabular quadrilateral fractures, pending further clinical validation. Placement of cortical screws near the fracture line is recommended, with additional screws at the sacroiliac joint if necessary. Early postoperative weight-bearing should be approached with caution, based on biomechanical evidence.
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.