Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31811374›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2020

Low-profile locking-plate vs. the conventional AO system: early comparative results in wrist arthrodesis.

J F Hernekamp, P Schönle, T Kremer, U Kneser, B Bickert

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2020. 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
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

J F Hernekamp *Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann Str. 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen, Germany. frederick.hernekamp@pgdiakonie.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7441-5776
P Schönle *Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann Str. 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
T KremerDepartment of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann Str. 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
U KneserDepartment of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann Str. 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
B BickertDepartment of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann Str. 13, 67071, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
Klinikum Ludwigshafen · DEKlinikum St. Georg · DEMartin-Luther-Krankenhaus · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTotal wrist arthrodesis represents a reliable salvage procedure for severe painful conditions of the wrist. To date, wrist arthrodesis using a dorsal plate reaching from the distal radius to the third metacarpal is still recommended. A new implant (APTUS© 2.5 TriLock Wrist Fusion Plate, Medartis Suisse) that does not cross the third carpometacarpal joint (CMCJ-3) has been introduced recently. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare both implants concerning early functional and clinical results. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 20 patients underwent total wrist arthrodesis [10, using the new APTUS© implant (APT); 10 using the Depuy-Synthes© LCP plates (AO)]. The postoperative control interval was 18.2 and 37.2 months in APT and AO, respectively. Clinical assessment included functional parameters such as active range of motion (AROM) for pronation and supination, grip strength, and passive range of motion of the CMCJ-3. Additionally the DASH score and the Krimmer wrist score as well as pain levels at rest and under stress conditions were evaluated.

resultsAll patients showed osseous healing without complications except one case of non-union in APT. There were no significant differences between both groups concerning grip strength, AROM of the wrist, pain levels, DASH- and Krimmer Score. APT showed a significantly increased passive range of motion of the CMCJ-3 compared to the unaffected contralateral side.

conclusionsThe new implant shows similar functional results compared to the standard procedure. The main advantage of the new implant is the fact that no implant removal is necessary due to the unaffected CMCJ-3. Furthermore the mobility of the CMCJ slightly increased and showed positive impact on hand kinematics.

Indexed as

ArthrodesisBone PlatesHand StrengthHumansPostoperative PainRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeWristWrist InjuriesHand surgerySalvage procedureWrist arthrodesisWrist pain

Identifiers

PMID31811374
OpenAlexW2992072237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.