ArticleJournal of functional biomaterials2026
Comparative Finite Element Evaluation of Polymeric and Metallic Bioresorbable Sinus Stents Under Quasi-Static Radial Compression.
Article in Journal of functional biomaterials, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To address the issues of displacement and insufficient positional stability observed in the clinical use of the PROPEL Mini stent, this study investigates the influence of different biodegradable materials on the mechanical properties of the stent under the constraint of a fixed monofilament braided closed-loop geometry. Finite element analyses are conducted using Abaqus/Explicit to quantitatively evaluate the nonlinear mapping between nominal diameter, axial length, and radial pressure throughout a loading-unloading cycle. The results reveal that while axial behavior is consistent during compression, material-specific plasticity causes irreversible geometric sets in Mg alloy and PLGA models, whereas the PCL stent achieves total elastic recovery to its initial dimensions. During unloading, the Mg alloy stent recovers to a nominal diameter of 28 mm with a reduced axial length of approximately 22 mm, whereas the PLGA stent exhibits a much smaller recovery diameter of 14 mm with an axial length of approximately 23 mm. These post-release configurations directly determine the functional expansion range of the biodegradable stents after implantation. During unloading, the Mg alloy stent provides the highest radial pressure (peak 6.8 kPa) with a functional recovery range up to 26.5 mm, ensuring superior scaffolding stability. In contrast, while PCL achieves the widest recovery (52 mm), its radial pressure is clinically negligible (the maximum value is still less than 165 Pa), and the PLGA model exhibits both insufficient support and a restricted functional recovery limit (13 mm). By using high-strength materials such as Mg alloys, the radial anchoring force of the stent can be effectively enhanced without changing the existing structure, providing a scientific basis for solving clinical displacement problems.
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.