Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27266275›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2016

Minimally invasive versus open surgery for acute Achilles tendon rupture: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.

Qingbo Li, Chuanying Wang, Yanqing Huo, Zhiwei Jia, Xiqian Wang

RetractedOpen access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Correction to: Total disc replacement versus fusion for lumbar degenerative disc disease: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018
    Article
  13. Minimally invasive surgery and percutaneous surgery of the hindfoot and midfoot.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2018
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Achilles tendon injuries.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Qingbo LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, People's Republic of China.
Chuanying WangDepartment of Rehabilitation, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, No.1 Jingba Road, Jinan, 250001, People's Republic of China. wangchuanyingjinan@163.com.
Yanqing HuoDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, People's Republic of China.
Zhiwei JiaDepartment of Orthopaedics, The 306th Hospital of People's Liberation Army, Beijing, People's Republic of China. jiazhiwei@139.com.
Xiqian WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Trauma, The Second Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, People's Republic of China.
Second Hospital of Shandong University · CNAffiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA number of meta-analyses have been carried out to evaluate the effects of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) versus open surgery (OS) for acute Achilles tendon rupture. However, discordant findings were seen in these meta-analyses. The present study, performing a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses regarding MIS versus OS of acute Achilles tendon rupture, aimed to assist decision-makers interpret and choose among conflicting meta-analyses, as well as to offer treatment recommendations based on current best evidence.

methodsThe literature search was performed to identify systematic reviews comparing MIS with OS for Achilles tendon rupture. Meta-analyses only comprising randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Two authors individually evaluated the quality of meta-analysis and extracted data. The Jadad decision algorithm was conducted to ascertain which meta-analysis offered the best evidence.

resultsA total of four meta-analyses was included. All these meta-analyses comprised RCTs or quasi-RCTs and were determined as Level-II evidence. The scores of the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) ranged from 7 to 10 (median 9.5). The Jadad algorithm indicated that the best meta-analysis should be chosen according to the search strategies and application of selection. A high-quality meta-analysis with more RCTs was chosen, which suggested that there was no statistically significant difference between MIS and OS regarding rerupture rate, tissue adhesion, sural nerve injury, deep infection, and deep vein thrombosis. However, MIS could decrease superficial infection rate, and had a better patient satisfaction for good to excellent outcomes in comparison to OS.

conclusionsBased on the best available evidence, MIS may be superior to OS for treating acute Achilles tendon rupture. However, due to some limitations, this should be cautiously interpreted, and further high-quality studies are needed.

Indexed as

Achilles TendonAlgorithmsHumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRuptureAchilles tendon ruptureMeta-analysisMinimally invasive surgeryOpen surgerySystematic review

Identifiers

PMID27266275
PMCPMC4893828
OpenAlexW2418184030

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.