YaBeSH Engineering and Technology Library

    • Journals
    • PaperQuest
    • YSE Standards
    • YaBeSH
    • Login
    View Item 
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Medical Devices
    • View Item
    •   YE&T Library
    • ASME
    • Journal of Medical Devices
    • View Item
    • All Fields
    • Source Title
    • Year
    • Publisher
    • Title
    • Subject
    • Author
    • DOI
    • ISBN
    Advanced Search
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Archive

    Comparative Mechanical Behavior of Stainless Steel and Titanium for Pectus Bar Applications

    Source: Journal of Medical Devices:;2026:;volume( 020 ):;issue:005
    Author:
    Ablordeppey, Eugene
    ,
    Ondar, Kyle
    ,
    Hezrony, Benjamin
    ,
    Brown, Philip
    DOI: 10.1115/1.4071746
    Publisher: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    Abstract: Abstract. Stainless steel pectus bars are the go-to material for treating pectus excavatum (PE), a condition characterized by a sunken chest wall. However, 5% of patients develop metal allergies and skin rashes. This study aimed to assess whether titanium is a viable alternative material for these implants, considering its lower risk of allergic reactions and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compatibility. Stainless steel (316L) and titanium (CP-Ti) pectus bars were subjected to static and dynamic fatigue testing using MTS testing frame. The static test involved ramp-to-failure four-point bending, where the force was measured until 15 mm of midspan displacement was detected. In the fatigue test, a sinusoidal amplitude of peak (250 N±5 N) and valley (50 N±5 N) was applied to the bars for 1 × 106 cycles at 15 Hz in displacement control. In the static test, both materials showed similar maximum force (p = 0.81), but titanium displayed higher values in plastic deformation (p = 0.0142), total energy (p = 0.0051), and stiffness (p = 0.0051), with relative differences of 16.14%, 3.99%, and 9.44%, respectively. During the fatigue test, titanium showed higher stiffness at 50 N and 250 N, with relative differences of 9.03% and 1.1%, respectively. However, stainless steel had higher values for all other fatigue measurements. Importantly, neither material sustained any noticeable damage after 1 × 106 cyclic loads. The study concluded that both materials perform equally well, but titanium's reduced risk of allergic reactions and MRI compatibility make it a favorable option for patients with metal allergies.
    • Download: (1.046Mb)
    • Show Full MetaData Hide Full MetaData
    • Get RIS
    • Item Order
    • Go To Publisher
    • Statistics

      Comparative Mechanical Behavior of Stainless Steel and Titanium for Pectus Bar Applications

    URI
    https://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4315599
    Collections
    • Journal of Medical Devices

    Show full item record

    contributor authorAblordeppey, Eugene
    contributor authorOndar, Kyle
    contributor authorHezrony, Benjamin
    contributor authorBrown, Philip
    date accessioned2026-08-23T07:47:05Z
    date available2026-08-23T07:47:05Z
    date copyright2026/10/01
    date issued2026
    identifier issn1932-6181
    identifier othermed-25-1044.pdf
    identifier urihttp://yetl.yabesh.ir/yetl1/handle/yetl/4315599
    description abstractAbstract. Stainless steel pectus bars are the go-to material for treating pectus excavatum (PE), a condition characterized by a sunken chest wall. However, 5% of patients develop metal allergies and skin rashes. This study aimed to assess whether titanium is a viable alternative material for these implants, considering its lower risk of allergic reactions and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) compatibility. Stainless steel (316L) and titanium (CP-Ti) pectus bars were subjected to static and dynamic fatigue testing using MTS testing frame. The static test involved ramp-to-failure four-point bending, where the force was measured until 15 mm of midspan displacement was detected. In the fatigue test, a sinusoidal amplitude of peak (250 N±5 N) and valley (50 N±5 N) was applied to the bars for 1 × 106 cycles at 15 Hz in displacement control. In the static test, both materials showed similar maximum force (p = 0.81), but titanium displayed higher values in plastic deformation (p = 0.0142), total energy (p = 0.0051), and stiffness (p = 0.0051), with relative differences of 16.14%, 3.99%, and 9.44%, respectively. During the fatigue test, titanium showed higher stiffness at 50 N and 250 N, with relative differences of 9.03% and 1.1%, respectively. However, stainless steel had higher values for all other fatigue measurements. Importantly, neither material sustained any noticeable damage after 1 × 106 cyclic loads. The study concluded that both materials perform equally well, but titanium's reduced risk of allergic reactions and MRI compatibility make it a favorable option for patients with metal allergies.
    publisherThe American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
    titleComparative Mechanical Behavior of Stainless Steel and Titanium for Pectus Bar Applications
    typeJournal Paper
    journal volume20
    journal issue5
    journal titleJournal of Medical Devices
    identifier doi10.1115/1.4071746
    treeJournal of Medical Devices:;2026:;volume( 020 ):;issue:005
    contenttypeFulltext
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian
     
    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2015  DuraSpace
    نرم افزار کتابخانه دیجیتال "دی اسپیس" فارسی شده توسط یابش برای کتابخانه های ایرانی | تماس با یابش
    yabeshDSpacePersian