ArticleInternational orthopaedics2012
Distraction osteogenesis using a longitudinal corticotomy.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Effectiveness of minimally invasive osteotomy Ilizarov technique combined with intramedullary nail for femoral lengthening].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2018Article
- Comment on Lan et al.: S-osteotomy with lengthening and then nailing compared with traditional Ilizarov method.International orthopaedics · 2014Article
- S-osteotomy with lengthening and then nailing compared with traditional Ilizarov method.International orthopaedics · 2013Article
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 at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the use of a longitudinal corticotomy (S-Z osteotomy) results in more rapid consolidation following distraction osteogenesis of short tibiae.
methodsSixty-seven lengthening procedures were performed in 51 patients ranging in age from nine to 38 (mean 25) years. Diagnoses included short stature (32 tibiae), postpolio limb deformity (22 tibiae), osteomyelitis (three tibiae), trauma (two tibiae) and other diagnoses (eight tibiae). Forty-five lengthenings were performed via a longitudinal corticotomy, and 22 were performed via a transverse corticotomy. Patients were followed until consolidation of the regenerated bone was noted radiographically (consolidation time). The healing index (consolidation time per centimetre of lengthening) was calculated for each patient and compared between groups.
resultsThe healing index was significantly lower in the S-Z group (30.8 ± 9.6 days/cm) than in the transverse corticotomy group (46.8 ± 20.2 days/cm) (p < 0.0001). Mean lengthening was 6.6 (range 2.5-12.5) cm in the S-Z group and 5.8 (range 2.0-12.0) cm in the transverse group (p = 0.28). Mean consolidation time was 6.3 ± 2.8 (range 3-16) months in the S-Z group and 8.1 ± 3.8 (range 3-13.5) months in the transverse group (p = 0.03).
conclusionThe S-Z osteotomy safely reduces consolidation time of regenerative bone during distraction osteogenesis in the tibia relative to a transverse corticotomy.
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.