ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Finite element biomechanical evaluation of a novel double-door screw-plate system for posterior cervical laminoplasty.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo address the surgical challenges and postoperative implant displacement associated with conventional internal fixation techniques in posterior cervical double-door laminoplasty, we developed the double-door screw-plate system (DDSPS). PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the biomechanical effects of DDSPS using finite element (FE) analysis.
methodsAn intact adult cervical spine FE model and three postoperative fixation models representing the DDSPS, the LA lamina staple, and the hydroxyapatite (HA) spacer construct were developed. Under a 75 N follower load and a 2.0 N·m moment applied in six loading directions, ROM, mean von Mises stress, implant-bone interface micromotion, and DDSPS stress distribution were evaluated.
resultsAcross the six loading directions, all three postoperative models showed a similar overall kinematic pattern, with the greatest increase in ROM occurring during flexion and only limited changes in the remaining directions. The DDSPS and LA lamina staple models demonstrated markedly lower implant-bone interface micromotion than the HA spacer model (DDSPS CSLIP1/2: 0.0008/0.0021 mm; LA lamina staple: 0.0020/0.0019 mm; HA spacer: 0.2506/0.1560 mm). In the DDSPS model, implant stress was mainly concentrated around the connecting axis, the plate surrounding the axial-side screw holes, and the axial-side fixation screws, with maximum stresses of 48.70 MPa in the plate and 67.09 MPa in the screw.
conclusionWithin the present finite element framework, the double-door screw-plate system (DDSPS) demonstrated a more favorable initial biomechanical profile, including lower interface micromotion and greater construct stability than the reference constructs.
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.