ArticleBMC surgery2026
Biomechanical comparison of frame configuration screw fixation and conventional plate fixation for Sanders type iii fractures: a finite element analysis.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSanders type III calcaneal fractures typically require surgical intervention. While open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) provides robust stabilisation, it is associated with a high incidence of surgical site complications. Closed reduction with percutaneous screw fixation (CRPF) presents a lower risk of complications, but consensus on the optimal screw configuration remains elusive. In this study, a novel frame configuration screw fixation (FCSF) method is proposed, and its biomechanical properties are compared with those of conventional plate fixation through finite element analysis.
methodsCT images of the calcaneus from a healthy volunteer were acquired. Software was used to construct Sanders type III calcaneal fracture models, an ORIF model, and two FCSF models. The material properties and contact modes were assigned. Forces of 350 N and 700 N were applied to compare the stress and displacement across the different models.
resultsUnder 350 N/700 N loads, the ORIF group exhibited peak implant stresses of 80.36 MPa/161.41 MPa, peak calcaneal fracture fragment stresses of 36.08 MPa/72.34 MPa, and peak calcaneal fracture fragment displacements of 0.5133 mm/1.0286 mm. Under identical loads, FCSF A and B exhibited peak internal plant stress values of 75.15 MPa/149.03 MPa and 85.92 MPa/170.79 MPa, respectively. The peak stress values in the calcaneal fracture fragment were 25.92 MPa/51.80 MPa and 30.39 MPa/60.86 MPa. The peak calcaneal fracture fragment displacements were 0.0896 mm/0.1788 mm and 0.1021 mm/0.2042 mm, respectively.
conclusionFCSF outcomes comparable to those of ORIF in the treatment of Sanders type III fractures were observed, indicating that FCSF provides sufficient biomechanical stability. The configuration with a transverse screw positioned above the inner and outer longitudinal screws is the more ideal fixation approach. This study offers biomechanical support for minimally invasive screw fixation of the calcaneus.
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.