Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32606715›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2020

Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique.

Jia-Fu Zhu, Wei-Xing Xu, Qiang Hu, Tian-Quan Wu, Hong Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Iliac crest bone graft versus cell-based grafts to augment spinal fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jia-Fu ZhuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People's Republic of China.
Wei-Xing XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People's Republic of China.
Qiang HuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People's Republic of China.
Tian-Quan WuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Shaoxing Keqiao District Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaoxing 312030, People's Republic of China.
Hong LiuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People's Republic of China.
Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province · CNShaoxing People's Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the effects of trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting and tricortical iliac bone harvesting on the iliac bone-graft donor site pain experienced by patients and their clinical effects.

methodsA retrospective analysis was performed using the clinical data of 65 patients with tibial plateau fractures who received autologous iliac bone-supporting grafts in two hospitals between January 2014 and January 2019. The patients who received trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting (34 cases) were in the experimental group, and those who received tricortical iliac bone harvesting (31 cases) were in the control group. This study compared differences in iliac bone-graft donor site incision length, intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested, operation time, and postoperative complications between the two bone-harvesting methods. Subsequently, it evaluated the pain experienced by the two patient groups in their iliac bone-graft donor sites and their clinical effects.

resultsOne week after surgery, the differences between the iliac bone-graft donor site pain score (measured using SF-MPQ-2) of the experimental group and the control group were not statistically different. However, 3 weeks, 5 weeks, and 3 months after surgery, the iliac bone-graft donor site pain scores of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The iliac bone-graft donor site incision length and operation time of the experimental group were not significantly different from those of the control group. However, the iliac bone-graft donor site intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested and the incidence of complications of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group.

conclusionTrapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting has lower donor site pain, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications. However, for bone grafting in regions with significant bone loss, tricortical iliac bone harvesting remains the optimal option.

Indexed as

bone graftingclinical effectiliac bonepain

Identifiers

PMID32606715
PMCPMC7320896
OpenAlexW3036643078

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.