ArticleJournal of hand and microsurgery2016
Titanium versus Stainless-Steel Plating in the Surgical Treatment of Distal Radius Fractures: A Randomized Trial.
Article in Journal of hand and microsurgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review of the use of titanium versus stainless steel implants for fracture fixation.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our purpose was to compare postoperative complications and rate of plate removal in titanium and stainless-steel plating of distal radius fractures (DRF). Patients following DRF were randomly fixed with titanium or stainless-steel plates using the same plating system. Complications, second surgeries, and plate prominence were documented. A total of 41 patients were treated with stainless-steel and 22 with titanium plates. Average follow-up was 60 ± 5.6 months. There was no difference in demographics, fracture characteristics, or follow-up between the groups. Plate prominence was found in 50% of radiographs (mean distance: 1.4 mm). Four titanium plates and three stainless-steel plates were removed (11%). Mean time to plate removal was 18.4 ± 4.6 months. There was no difference in removal rates between the groups. Plate material and prominence, age, fracture comminution and smoking status were not associated with plate removal. Our results support using volar and dorsal plates regardless of the plate material.
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.