ArticleDer Unfallchirurg2019
[Biomechanical comparison of six different fixation techniques for treatment of metacarpal neck fractures].
Article in Der Unfallchirurg, 2019. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the primary stability of commonly used fixation techniques for metacarpal neck fractures and to compare it with that of an innovative osteosynthesis device: IlluminOss™, the photodynamic bone stabilization system™. MATERIAL AND
methodsMetacarpal neck fractures were created on the second to fifth metacarpal bones of 24 freshly frozen human cadavers using a band saw. Specimens were randomly assigned to one of six groups and treated with (1) K-wire fixation, (2) dorsal plating, (3) external fixation, (4) cross-threaded K‑wire fixation, (5) IlluminOss™ and (6) locked IlluminOss™. In each group 16 specimens each underwent either monocyclic or polycyclic loading protocols.
resultsDuring monocyclic loading none of the specimens failed prior to a maximum deformation of 3 mm. With intramedullary K‑wire fixation the mean loads were significantly lower than those of the other techniques. Mean loads causing 2 mm deformation with external fixation were significantly lower than those with dorsal plate osteosynthesis. The mean linear stiffness of the K‑wire osteosynthesis was significantly lower than for the other fixation techniques and all methods of external fixation were significantly lower than dorsal plates. There were no significant differences with respect to the linear stiffness between the groups with dorsal plates, fragment fixation system (FFS), IlluminOss™ and locked IlluminOss™. During polycyclic testing the loss of resistance in dorsal plate osteosynthesis was significantly lower than with K‑wire and IlluminOss™ fixation. No significant differences in loss of resistance could be shown between dorsal plate osteosynthesis, external fixation, FFS and locked IlluminOss™.
conclusionIn summary, IlluminOss™ can be used as an intramedullary stabilization system for treatment of metacarpal neck fractures. In combination with locking screws the biomechanical characteristics of IlluminOss™ are comparable to the other fixation techniques.
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.