Trial reportFoot & ankle international2020
Temporary Bridge Plating vs Primary Arthrodesis of the First Tarsometatarsal Joint in Lisfranc Injuries: Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Foot & ankle international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Medial tarsometatarsal injuries lead to overall post-traumatic osteoarthritis in 1 in 3 patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Pooled it
- Primary arthrodesis versus open reduction internal fixation for acute Lisfranc injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Article
- Functional Outcome and Patient Satisfaction After Primary vs Secondary Arthrodesis for Lisfranc Injuries: Toward a Single-Surgery Approach.Foot & ankle international · 2025Article
- Primary Arthrodesis or Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Open Reduction Internal Fixation vs Primary Arthrodesis for Lisfranc Fracture-Dislocations: A Cost Analysis.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2024Article
- A Systematic Review of Outcomes Following Lisfranc Injury Fixation: Removal vs Retention of Metalwork.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2022Article
- Staged surgery for closed Lisfranc injury with dislocation.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Lisfranc injuries: fix or fuse? : a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature presenting outcome after surgical treatment for Lisfranc injuries.Bone & joint open · 2021Article
- Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnstable Lisfranc injuries are best treated with anatomic reduction and stable fixation. There are controversies regarding which type of stabilization is best. In the present study, we compared primary arthrodesis of the first tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint to temporary bridge plating in unstable Lisfranc injuries.
methodsForty-eight patients with Lisfranc injuries were included and followed for 2 years. Twenty-four patients were randomized to primary arthrodesis (PA) of the medial 3 TMT joints, whereas 24 patients were randomized to temporary bridge plate (BP) over the first TMT joint and primary arthrodesis of the second and third TMT joints. The main outcome parameter was the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale and the secondary outcome parameters were the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and visual analog scale for pain (VAS pain). Computed tomography (CT) scans pre- and postoperatively were obtained. Radiographs were obtained at follow-ups. Pedobarographic examination was performed at the 2-year follow-up. Twenty-two of 24 patients in the PA and 23/24 in the BP group completed the 2-year follow-up.
resultsThe mean AOFAS midfoot score 2 years postoperatively was 89 (SD 9) in the PA group and 85 (SD 15) in the BP group (
conclusionBoth treatment groups had good outcome scores. The first metatarsal was better aligned in the BP group; however, there was a high incidence of radiographic osteoarthritis in this group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic level I, prospective randomized controlled study.
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.