ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Biomechanical comparison of high hydrostatic pressure versus liquid nitrogen treatment for devitalized bone grafts: a fresh porcine model study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDevitalized bone grafting is a widely used reconstructive technique after tumor resection. Conventional devitalization methods, such as autoclaving and irradiation, compromise the biological and mechanical properties of bone. Cryotreatment with liquid nitrogen has been associated with relatively early bone union; however, concerns remain regarding reduced initial mechanical strength and the risk of nonunion. High hydrostatic pressure (HHP) has been proposed as a novel devitalization method that may better preserve bone strength. This study aimed to compare the mechanical properties of fresh porcine bone treated with HHP versus liquid nitrogen.
methodsFresh, unfrozen porcine vertebrae and femurs were collected and processed within 72 h to avoid confounding mechanical effects of prior freezing. Trabecular bone cubes (10 mm per side) from the vertebrae underwent compressive testing (n = 10 per group), and cortical bone beams (5 mm wide) from the femurs underwent three-point bending tests (n = 12 per group). Specimens were allocated to three groups: HHP-treated (200 MPa, 10 min), liquid nitrogen-treated (- 196 °C, 20 min), and untreated control. Mechanical testing was performed using a universal testing machine. One-way analysis of variance with Tukey's post hoc test (p < 0.05) was used for statistical analysis.
resultsIn trabecular bone compression testing, both HHP-treated and liquid nitrogen-treated groups demonstrated lower maximum compressive load at failure than the control group. A significant difference was observed only between the liquid nitrogen-treated and control groups (p = 0.003). The difference between the HHP-treated and control groups was not significant (p = 0.07), and no significant difference was found between the two treatment groups (p = 0.39). In cortical bone three-point bending tests, no significant differences in maximum load at failure were observed among the groups (p = 0.37).
conclusionsHHP treatment did not significantly compromise mechanical properties compared with the untreated control, whereas liquid nitrogen treatment significantly reduced the maximum compressive load at failure of trabecular bone. These findings suggest that HHP may represent a structurally viable devitalization method for bone grafts, particularly in load-bearing applications.
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.