Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27022610›Full record

Trial reportBioMed research international2016

Demineralized Bone Matrix Add-On for Acceleration of Bone Healing in Atypical Subtrochanteric Femoral Fracture: A Consecutive Case-Control Study.

Noratep Kulachote, Paphon Sa-ngasoongsong, Norachart Sirisreetreerux, Pongsthorn Chanplakorn, Praman Fuangfa, Chanyut Suphachatwong, Wiwat Wajanavisit

Open access · hybridAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BioMed research international, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Does the addition of demineralized bone matrix to fixation of acute comminuted clavicle fractures affect healing outcomes?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  4. Current concepts of bone grafting in trauma surgery.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Noratep KulachoteDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Paphon Sa-ngasoongsongDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-1936-4456
Norachart SirisreetreeruxDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pongsthorn ChanplakornDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Praman FuangfaDepartment of Radiology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chanyut SuphachatwongDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Wiwat WajanavisitDepartment of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Mahidol University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDelayed union and nonunion are common complications in atypical femoral fractures (AFFs) despite having good fracture fixation. Demineralized bone matrix (DBM) is a successfully proven method for enhancing fracture healing of the long bone fracture and nonunion and should be used in AFFs. This study aimed to compare the outcome after subtrochanteric AFFs (ST-AFFs) fixation with and without DBM. MATERIALS AND

methodsA prospective study was conducted on 9 ST-AFFs patients using DBM (DBM group) during 2013-2014 and compared with a retrospective consecutive case series of ST-AFFs patients treated without DBM (2010-2012) (NDBM group, 9 patients). All patients were treated with the same standard guideline and followed up until fractures completely united. Postoperative outcomes were then compared.

resultsDBM group showed a significant shorter healing time than NDBM group (28.1 ± 14.4 versus 57.9 ± 36.8 weeks, p = 0.04). Delayed union was found in 4 patients (44%) in DBM group compared with 7 patients (78%) in NDBM group (p > 0.05). No statistical difference of nonunion was demonstrated between both groups (DBM = 1 and NDBM = 2, p > 0.05). Neither postoperative infection nor severe local tissue reaction was found.

conclusionsDBM is safe and effective for accelerating the fracture healing in ST-AFFx and possibly reduces nonunion after fracture fixation. Trial registration number is TCTR20151021001.

Indexed as

Bone MatrixFracture HealingAgedBone SubstitutesFemaleFemoral FracturesHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesBone Substitutes

Identifiers

PMID27022610
PMCPMC4789057
OpenAlexW2286965627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.