ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2019
Characteristics of ultrasound device: a new technology for bone curettage and excavation.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultrasonic Technique for Femoral Tunnel Creation in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction.Arthroscopy techniques · 2023Article
- Dural Changes Induced by an Ultrasonic Bone Curette in an Excised Porcine Spinal Cord.Veterinary sciences · 2022Article
- Technical note: rectangular femoral tunnel for anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a new ultrasonic device: a feasibility study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 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
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasonic (US) devices are used in laparoscopic, dental, and spinal surgeries, while it is difficult to use for the joint under irrigation and perfusion solutions due to lack of power. A new US device is developed with greater voltage improvement and has been implemented in the arthroscopic field. The aim is to compare the characteristics of the US devices with the conventional ones in water.
methodsTwenty bone blocks from the porcine femur were settled in a holder in water. A 4.0 mm diameter abrader burr moved 15 mm along the long axis of the bone block in ten blocks for three times. A 4.3 mm wide curette blade powered by ultrasonic vibration was moved in the same manner in the other ten blocks. The gutter shape, including the gutter depth and the bottom angle of the gutter, and the curetted area ratio of the gutter were assessed. Forty bones blocks from the porcine femurs were clamped with a holder in water, while the cortical bone surface must be located on the side. A 5 mm diameter drill excavated the bone along the previously-inserted guide wire to the 15 mm depth for twenty blocks. Next, the US excavation probe of 5x4mm rectangular shape was moved to the same depth in the other twenty blocks. Each ten block was cut in half along the bone tunnel and was assessed the surface roughness at three area, while the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the tunnel were measured and the ratio of the measured CSA was calculated based on an expected CSA in the remaining ten blocks for each device.
resultsThe depth of curettage and bottom angle were significantly smaller with the US device than with the abrader burr at all planes, while the curetted area ratio created by each device was mostly equal to the other. Surface roughness was similar in two evacuating devices except one area. CSA ratio with the US excavation device was significantly smaller than that with the drill.
conclusionUS curettage has an advantage to flatly curette bone surfaces, while a bone tunnel can be accurately created with the US device.
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.