Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 705

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of Mechanical Factors on the Fracture Healing Process

Claes, Lutz E., Heigele, Christa A., Neidlinger-Wilke, Cornelia, Kaspar, Daniela, Seidl, Walter, Margevicius, Kristen J., Augat, Peter·1998·Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Abstract

An interdisciplinary study based on animal experiments, cell culture studies, and finite element models is presented. In a sheep model, the influence of the osteotomy gap size and interfragmentary motion on the healing success was investigated. Increasing gap sizes delayed the healing process. Increasing movement stimulated callus formation but not tissue quality. Typical distributions of intramembranous bone, endochondral ossification, and connective tissue in the fracture gap are quantified. The comparison of the mechanical data determined by a finite element model with the histologic images allowed the attribution of certain mechanical conditions to the type of tissue differentiation. Intramembranous bone formation was found for strains smaller than approximately 5% and small hydrostatic pressure (< 0.15 MPa). Strains less than 15% and hydrostatic pressure more than 0.15 MPa stimulated endochondral ossification. Larger strains led to connective tissue. Cell culture studies on the influence of strain on osteoblasts supported these findings. Proliferation and transforming growth factor beta production was increased for strains up to 5% but decreased for larger strains. Osteoblasts under larger strains (> 4%) turned away from the principal strain axis and avoided larger deformations. It is hypothesized that gap size and the amount of strain and hydrostatic pressure along the calcified surface in the fracture gap are the fundamental mechanical factors involved in bone healing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00003086-199810001-00015

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 705

Metadata

Authors
Claes, L. E., Heigele, C. A., Neidlinger-Wilke, C., Kaspar, D., Seidl, W., Margevicius, K. J., & Augat, P.
Venue
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
Published
1998-10
Volume
355S
Issue
355 Suppl
Pages
S132-S147
ISSN
0009-921X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966260373
Cited by
705
References
1
FWCI
4.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of Mechanical Factors on the Fracture Healing Process. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00003086-199810001-00015
The paper
Claes, L. E., Heigele, C. A., Neidlinger-Wilke, C., Kaspar, D., Seidl, W., Margevicius, K. J., & Augat, P. (1998). Effects of Mechanical Factors on the Fracture Healing Process. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199810001-00015

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.