ArticleBiomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology2026
Mechanical characterization of human versus porcine brain tissue under large strains.
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.
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
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
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.