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
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Controlled mechanical stimulation in the treatment of tibial fractures
KENWRIGHT, J., & GOODSHIP, A. E. (1989) · Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research · doi:10.1097/00003086-198904000-00006 · Cited by 373
Cited by
Cellular biology of fracture healing
Bahney, C. S., Zondervan, R. L., Allison, P., Theologis, A., Ashley, J. W., Ahn, J., Miclau, T., Marcucio, R. S., & Hankenson, K. D. (2019) · Journal of Orthopaedic Research · doi:10.1002/jor.24170 · Cited by 577
Angiogenesis in bone regeneration
Hankenson, K. D., Dishowitz, M., Gray, C., & Schenker, M. (2011) · Injury · doi:10.1016/j.injury.2011.03.035 · Cited by 560
Tibio‐femoral loading during human gait and stair climbing
Taylor, W. R., Heller, M. O., Bergmann, G., & Duda, G. N. (2004) · Journal of Orthopaedic Research · doi:10.1016/j.orthres.2003.09.003 · Cited by 366
Byrne, D. P., Lacroix, D., Planell, J. A., Kelly, D. J., & Prendergast, P. J. (2007) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.09.003 · Cited by 362
Locked Plating of Distal Femur Fractures Leads to Inconsistent and Asymmetric Callus Formation
Lujan, T. J., Henderson, C. E., Madey, S. M., Fitzpatrick, D. C., Marsh, J. L., & Bottlang, M. (2010) · Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma · doi:10.1097/bot.0b013e3181be6720 · Cited by 290
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.