Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32000443›Full record

ArticleMedicine2020

Complications of hardware removal in pediatric upper limb surgery: A retrospective single-center study of 317 patients.

Philipp Scheider, Rudolf Ganger, Sebastian Farr

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Waste Generation in Pediatric Orthopaedic Hardware Removal Surgery.Journal of the Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Implant Removal Complications in Pediatric Orthopedics.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2025
    Article
  4. [Implant Removal Complications in Pediatric Orthopedics].Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Philipp ScheiderMilitary Hospital.
Rudolf GangerOrthopedic Hospital Speising, Department of Pediatric Orthopedics and Adult Foot and Ankle Surgery, Vienna, Austria.
Sebastian FarrOrthopedic Hospital Speising, Department of Pediatric Orthopedics and Adult Foot and Ankle Surgery, Vienna, Austria.
Military Hospital · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies indicated that hardware removal may lead to increased morbidity and therefore, at least in adults, remains questionable for certain indications. However, risks such as corrosion or local reactions may be less likely in younger patients with current, improved hardware materials. We sought to retrospectively determine complication rates of hardware removal in pediatric upper limb surgery, and establish potential risk factors for increased morbidity.All children and adolescents who underwent inpatient hardware removal under anesthesia after previous upper limb surgery between 2002 and 2016 were retrospectively evaluated. The following details were extracted at the latest follow-up: demographics, implant location, hardware material, duration of surgery, duration of hardware in situ, and any complications graded according to Goslings et al (grade 0-5) and Sink et al (grade 1-5), respectively. Correlations were calculated to establish potential relationships between specific outcome parameters (e.g., location, duration of surgery etc.) and complication grades.A total of 2089 children were evaluated of whom 317 patients with 449 interventions (mean age 9.4 years) fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this study. Overall, 203 K-wires (46%), 97 plates (22%), 102 external fixators (23%), 32 intramedullary nails (7%), 6 screws (1%), 4 cerclages (1%) and 1 pin (0.2%) were removed; most common locations were the forearm (34%) and humerus (24%). The mean duration of surgery was 40 minutes (± 50.9), mean time in situ was 194 days (± 319.6). Complication rates were low overall, with most being grade 0 (n = 372; 83%) or 1 (n = 60; 13%) according to Goslings et al and grade 1 (n = 386; 86%) and 2 (n = 42; 9%) according to Sink et al. No severe complications were observed. The following predictors were related to the severity of the complications in linear regression analysis: more distal localizations, external fixators, longer duration of surgery and female sex.Hardware removal under anesthesia in the pediatric upper extremity has produced a low complication rate with no severe complications and can thus be considered to be safe. Increased morbidity occurred in more distal localizations, external fixators, longer surgeries and females.Level of Evidence: Therapeutic, Level IV.

Indexed as

Prostheses and ImplantsAdolescentChildDevice RemovalFemaleHumansMaleReoperationRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsUpper Extremity

Identifiers

PMID32000443
PMCPMC7004601
OpenAlexW3004309135

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.