ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Biomechanical effects of cortical bone trajectory and hybrid CBT-TT fixation on fusion-site mechanics and adjacent segment loading: a finite element study.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
Background: Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) with pedicle screw fixation is a standard treatment for degenerative spinal disorders. However, rigid fixation may accelerate adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Cortical bone trajectory (CBT) fixation has been proposed as an alternative to traditional trajectory (TT) fixation in lumbar fusion surgery. However, the biomechanical characteristics of CBT, particularly in comparison with hybrid CBT-TT fixation, remain incompletely understood. Methods: A validated L4-L5 finite element model was developed to compare CBT, TT, and hybrid CBT-TT fixation constructs. Two simulation phases were performed. The immediate postoperative model was used to evaluate fusion-site micromotion and strain distribution, whereas the post-fusion model was used to assess adjacent-segment range of motion (ROM), intradiscal pressure (IDP), and facet joint force. Results: All fixation constructs provided sufficient segmental stability. Compared with TT fixation, CBT fixation produced greater but controlled fusion-site micromotion and a broader strain-stimulated region. The hybrid CBT-TT construct demonstrated intermediate biomechanical characteristics between CBT and TT fixation. Following simulated solid fusion, CBT and hybrid CBT-TT fixation reduced superior adjacent-segment ROM, IDP, and facet joint forces relative to TT fixation, indicating lower adjacent-segment biomechanical loading. Conclusion: CBT fixation modified fusion-site mechanical conditions while maintaining overall construct stability. Both CBT and hybrid CBT-TT fixation reduced adjacent-segment biomechanical loading compared with TT fixation. These findings represent comparative biomechanical observations under simulated conditions and should not be interpreted as direct evidence of enhanced osseous fusion or prevention of ASD.
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.