ArticleHand (New York, N.Y.)2013
The use of bone cement in difficult distal radius fractures.
Article in Hand (New York, N.Y.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adipose-Derived Stem Cells in Bone Tissue Engineering: Useful Tools with New Applications.Stem cells international · 2019Review
- Is calcium phosphate augmentation a viable option for osteoporotic hip fractures?Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe lack of structural support remains a challenge in the treatment of comminuted distal radius fractures. Calcium phosphate and calcium sulfate bone cement has been used in other fracture locations in addition to fixation and has been shown to allow for retention of reduction in difficult cases.
methodsA case-control retrospective review of 34 consecutive distal radius fractures treated with surgery was performed with the patients classified by Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen (AO) classification. Complications and postoperative radiographs were evaluated.
resultsCement was used in the most difficult cases. Radial height was retained in both groups. Volar tilt was significantly better in the cement group. There were no significant differences between the case and control groups for any complication. No complications related to the use of the cement were found.
conclusionsThe use of bone cement as an adjunct to fixation of distal radius fractures seems to include minimal risks and may afford a technical advantage in maintaining reduction during surgery for difficult fractures. Since there is an aspect of fracture difficulty that we cannot control for by using radiographic assessment alone, cement may provide an advantage over fixation without cement, despite similar outcomes. Bone cement can be part of the "tool box" for difficult distal radius fractures. Further study is necessary to define the technical advantages and limitations of each particular cement product.
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.