Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32778920›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2021

A new criterion for assessing Ilizarov treatment outcomes in nonunion of the tibia.

Łukasz Szelerski, Andżelika Pajchert Kozłowska, Sławomir Żarek, Radosław Górski, Karol Mochocki, Maciej Dejnek, Wiktor Urbański, Paweł Reichert, Piotr Morasiewicz

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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

9 authors.

Łukasz SzelerskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Musculoskeletal Traumatology, Medical University of Warsaw, Lindeya 4, 02-005, Warsaw, Poland.
Andżelika Pajchert KozłowskaDepartment and Clinic of Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Surgery, Wrocław Medical University, ul. Borowska 213, 50-556, Wrocław, Poland.
Sławomir ŻarekDepartment of Orthopedics and Musculoskeletal Traumatology, Medical University of Warsaw, Lindeya 4, 02-005, Warsaw, Poland.
Radosław GórskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Musculoskeletal Traumatology, Medical University of Warsaw, Lindeya 4, 02-005, Warsaw, Poland.
Karol MochockiDepartment of Orthopedics and Musculoskeletal Traumatology, Medical University of Warsaw, Lindeya 4, 02-005, Warsaw, Poland.
Maciej DejnekDivision of Sport Medicine, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Wroclaw Medical University, Bartla 5, 51-618, Wrocław, Poland.
Wiktor UrbańskiDepartment and Clinic of Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Surgery, Wrocław Medical University, ul. Borowska 213, 50-556, Wrocław, Poland.
Paweł ReichertDivision of Sport Medicine, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Wroclaw Medical University, Bartla 5, 51-618, Wrocław, Poland.
Piotr MorasiewiczDepartment and Clinic of Orthopaedic and Traumatologic Surgery, Wrocław Medical University, ul. Borowska 213, 50-556, Wrocław, Poland. morasp@poczta.onet.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7587-666X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe purpose of this study was to assess a population of patients with nonunion of the tibia treated with the Ilizarov method in terms of achieved union rates and maintained union rates, determination of re-fracture factors, with a subsequent comparison of our findings with those reported in the available literature. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis study was a retrospective assessment of 102 patients with nonunion of the tibia treated with the Ilizarov method in the period 2008-2015. The assessed parameters were bone union achieved during treatment, duration of stabilization with an Ilizarov external fixator, and maintained bone union at the last follow-up visit.

resultsThe mean age at the start of treatment was 46.7 years (11-84 years). The mean follow-up period was 7 years (2-12 years). Bone union was achieved in all patients. The mean duration of Ilizarov stabilization in the study group was 7.9 months (2.8-20.7 months). The rate of union maintained at the last follow-up visit was 95.1%.

conclusionsAll patients in our study achieved bone union, which constitutes a better outcome than those reported on average in the literature (73.7-100%). The mean length of time which the Ilizarov external fixator was in place in our patients was 8.3 months, which is consistent with the data from literature. Infection, atrophic nonunion, nonunion in 1/3 distal of tibia, and close surgery technique are risk factors of re-fracture. None of the analyzed studies assessed the proportion of patients with maintained bone union. In our study, maintained bone union was observed in 95.1% of patients at the follow-up visit at least 2 years after treatment, which indicates excellent long-term treatment outcomes in nonunion of the tibia treated with the Ilizarov method.

Indexed as

Ilizarov TechniqueAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildFractures, UnunitedHumansMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTibiaTibial FracturesTreatment OutcomeYoung AdultIlizarov methodMaintained unionNonunionTibiaUnion rates

Identifiers

PMID32778920
PMCPMC8049889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.