ArticleInjury2026
Influence of subchondral bone density on intra-articular stresses due to fixation hardware instrumentation and removal: A biomechanical cadaver study.
Article in Injury, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTibial plateau fractures are often surgically treated to restore native joint congruity and articular alignment. While these injuries portend an increased risk for end stage knee osteoarthritis, it is unknown whether the fixation constructs contribute to the development of osteoarthritis by influencing articular stress distribution following instrumentation.
methodsWe conducted a cadaver study measuring resultant intra-articular stresses of the native knee due to physiological levels of ex-vivo loading, after instrumentation with plate and screw fixation, and after implant removal. To account for variable subchondral bone density, we used 3D printed bone with osteoporotic and normal cancellous bone volume fraction, and SawBones where there is no appreciable cancellous bone.
resultsThere was no statistical difference in peak, average, or total contact pressures following implant fixation and removal from the preimplantation articular pressure states in all loads and all models (p > 0.05). There was also no difference between the pressure changes of the cadaveric and Sawbones models. There were statistically significant pressure changes between cadaveric and 3D printed models following fixation, however these changes were within previously described physiologic loads (<10 MPa).
conclusionsSubchondral instrumentation of tibial plateau fractures did not materially alter articular pressures. These findings suggest that the development of end-stage knee osteoarthritis may not be a result of altered biomechancial stresses from the instrumentation. Further, elective removal of implants is not supported by biomechanical reasons alone to reduce future risk. Supplementing cadaveric studies with patient-specific models while tuning variables can enhance the fidelity of these investigations. STATEMENT OF CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The findings may guide surgeons in their operative indications and clinical decision making as well as guide future biomechanical research on periarticular implant effects.
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.