Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41784809›Full record

ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2026

Mechanical characterization of human versus porcine brain tissue under large strains.

Nina Reiter, Sarah Nistler, Lucas Hoffmann, Lars Bräuer, Friedrich Paulsen, Silvia Budday

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology, 2026. 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

6 authors.

Nina ReiterInstitute of Continuum Mechanics and Biomechanics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Dr.-Mack-Str. 81, 90762, Fürth, Germany.
Sarah NistlerInstitute of Continuum Mechanics and Biomechanics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Dr.-Mack-Str. 81, 90762, Fürth, Germany.
Lucas HoffmannDepartment of Neuropathology, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Schwabachanlage 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Lars BräuerInstitute of Functional and Clinical Anatomy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Universitätsstr. 19, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Friedrich PaulsenInstitute of Functional and Clinical Anatomy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Universitätsstr. 19, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
Silvia BuddayInstitute of Continuum Mechanics and Biomechanics, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Dr.-Mack-Str. 81, 90762, Fürth, Germany. silvia.budday@fau.de.

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 460333672 - CRC 1540 Exploring Brain Mechanics (subproject A02)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to the limited availability of human body donor brains, biomechanical testing for material parameter identification is often done on animal tissue. So far, only one study has compared human and animal brain tissue under indentation, which provides data for the small strain regime and hence is not applicable to large-strain scenarios like surgery. Here, we compare the large-strain behavior of human and porcine brain tissue from four anatomical regions (corona radiata, putamen, cerebellar white matter, and brain stem) under compression, tension, and shear. Our results from cyclic loading tests show that samples from the cerebral white matter behave similarly for both species under all loading modes, whereas samples from the cerebellar white matter are similar only under compression-tension, but not shear loading. For regions with mixed gray and white matter, we observe a softer behavior for porcine samples under all loading modes. The stress relaxation behavior is similar in both species, except for samples from the putamen. These findings indicate that porcine brain tissue can be used as an alternative for human tissue to study general tissue mechanics. However, since the porcine brain is much smaller and therefore, less brain regions can be characterized mechanically, human brain data are still needed to calibrate full brain simulation models.

Indexed as

BrainStress, MechanicalAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaCompressive StrengthHumansShear StrengthSpecies SpecificitySwineBrain tissueCompressionHumanLarge strainsMechanical testingPorcineShearTensionViscoelasticity

Identifiers

PMID41784809
PMCPMC12963166

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.