ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Structural design and biomechanical analysis of anti- subsidence gradient porous artificial vertebrae combined with a topology framework.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn total disc replacement, mechanical failure and implant subsidence are significant complications after vertebral body replacement. Therefore, the design of a new artificial vertebral implant(AVI)that can ensure safety and improve prosthesis's subsidence has become a key challenge for spinal reconstruction.
methodsThis study involved designing a new AVI. Its exterior is a topological entity framework, and its interior is a gradient triply periodic minimal surface (TPMS) gyroid structure, which simulates cortical bone and cancellous bone, respectively. To enhance the safety and stability of the prosthesis. The biomechanical properties of AVIs under different physiological postures were analysed using the finite element method(FEM). The samples were prepared using selective laser melting (SLM), and the quasi-static compression and subsidence experiments were carried out for evaluation.
resultsThe peak stress of the topological gradient gyroid AVI was significantly lower than that of the traditional titanium mesh cage (TMC) and the truss + fluorite AVI, with a maximum reduction of 69.7%. Under all working conditions, the peak stress at the bone-implant interface of the vertebrae was 5.9% -14.1% lower than that of the truss + fluorite AVI and much lower than that of the TMC, with a decrease of 44.3%. Quasi-static compression experiments show that the maximum compression load of the topological gradient gyroid AVI is approximately 1.12 times greater than that of the truss + fluorite AVI and significantly greater than that of the TMC. This indicates that topological gradient gyroid AVI meets safety requirements. Additionally, its anti-subsidence ability is 20.4% higher than that of traditional porous AVI.
conclusionsCompared with traditional AVIs, the combination of topology optimization framework and gradient gyroid structure significantly improves the mechanical strength and subsidence resistance of the AVI, and can effectively reduce the stress concentration, which is expected to become the preferred scheme for spinal reconstruction.
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.