Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32076736›Full record

ReviewDer Radiologe2020

[Special aspects of stress fractures].

Kolja M Thierfelder, Judith S Gerhardt, Sönke Langner, Thomas Mittlmeier, Marc-André Weber

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Radiologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. [Stress reactions and stress fractures].Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kolja M ThierfelderInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland. kolja.thierfelder@med.uni-rostock.de.
Judith S GerhardtInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland.
Sönke LangnerInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland.
Thomas MittlmeierAbteilung für Unfall‑, Hand- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Chirurgische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Schillingallee 35, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland.
Marc-André WeberInstitut für Diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Kinder- und Neuroradiologie, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Ernst-Heydemann-Str. 6, 18057, Rostock, Deutschland.
Universitätsmedizin Rostock · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStress fractures are very common in clinical practice. They can be classified into fatigue fractures that affect healthy bone and insufficiency fractures in which the bone is already damaged or weakened. IMAGING MODALITIES: Conventional x‑ray images are the standard method in case of a suspected stress fracture. If x‑rays are negative, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be performed, which has a significantly higher sensitivity and can provide further information such as evidence for a pathological fracture. Computed tomography (CT) is suitable for an exact representation of the course of the fracture line and thus for preoperative planning. As a nuclear medicine procedure, bone scintigraphy can be used as bone metabolism in the area of a fracture is increased. KEY IMAGING

findingsTypical x‑ray signs are the gray cortex sign, the periosteal reaction and a fracture line that is often oriented perpendicular to the cortex and which shows a parallel sclerotic line. Later on, callus material becomes evident. MRI reveals periosteal and medullary edema, a reaction in the surrounding soft tissue and a T1-hypointense fracture line. In CT, the fracture line is hypodense and often associated with an adjacent sclerotic area.

conclusionsFor a correct diagnosis, it is important to be familiar with the appropriate imaging modalities and the respective imaging findings of stress fractures. If initial x‑rays are normal and symptoms persist, an MRI should be performed. This is also to rule out other causes such as a pathological fracture.

Indexed as

Fractures, StressHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingRadiographyTomography, X-Ray ComputedComputed tomographyFatigue fractureInsufficiency fractureMagnetic resonance imagingStress fracture

Identifiers

PMID32076736
OpenAlexW3008049428

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.