Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30715014›Full record

ArticleActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2018

The management of syndesmotic screw in ankle fractures.

Francesco Pogliacomi, Carlotta Artoni, Sara Riccoboni, Filippo Calderazzi, Enrico Vaienti, Francesco Ceccarelli

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francesco PogliacomiPARMA UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SURGICAL SCIENCES ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMATOLOGY SECTION. fpogliacomi@yahoo.com.
Carlotta Artoni
Sara Riccoboni
Filippo Calderazzi
Enrico Vaienti
Francesco Ceccarelli
University of Parma · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimThere is a wide debate about the number, diameter and length of the syndesmotic screw and necessity and timing for its removal. The aim of this study is to determine whether functional and radiological outcomes differ in patients operated for Weber type B and C ankle fractures who had syndesmotic screws removed (group 1) compared to those who did not (group 2). Furthermore, authors want to define if it is really necessary to remove this device and its correct timing. MATERIALS AND

methods90 patients were eligible for the study. The functional outcomes were analyzed 1 year after surgery using OMAS and AOFAS scores. Radiographic evaluation assessed the tibiofibular distance immediately and 12 months after surgery and fracture's healing.

resultsClinical and x-rays results were similar in both groups at follow-up. DISCUSSION: Fractures with interruption of syndesmosis are lesions that, if not well treated, are complicated by joint stiffness, residual pain and post-traumatic osteoarthritis. Syndesmotic screw removal is not routinely performed, thus accepting the risk of rupture but avoiding a new surgery.

conclusionsResults observed suggest that syndesmotic screw removal is not necessary. If surgeon decide to remove this device correct timing is mandatory in order to obtain satisfactory long-term results.

Indexed as

Bone ScrewsAdultAgedAnkle FracturesDevice RemovalEquipment FailureFemaleFracture Fixation, InternalFracture HealingHumansMaleMiddle AgedRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID30715014
PMCPMC6503419
OpenAlexW2998288505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.