Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32843951›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2020

Fracture Pattern Influences Radial Head Replacement Size Determination Among Experienced Elbow Surgeons.

Davide Cucchi, Francesco Luceri, Andrea Celli, Alessandra Menon, Raul Barco, Kilian Wegmann, Pietro Randelli, Denise Eygendaal, Paolo Arrigoni, ESSKA Elbow and Wrist Committee 2016–2018

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Davide Cucchi *Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6284-7977
Francesco Luceri *IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Via Riccardo Galeazzi 4, 20161 Milan, Italy.
Andrea CelliDepartment of Orthopaedic surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Hesperia Hospital, Via Arquà, 80/A, 41125 Modena, Italy.
Alessandra MenonLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2786-8099
Raul BarcoShoulder and Elbow Unit, Hospital Universitario La Paz, Paseo de la Castellana 261, Madrid, 28046 Spain.
Kilian WegmannCenter for Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center, Cologne, Kerpenerstrasse 62, 50937 Cologne, Germany.
Pietro RandelliLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milan, Italy.
Denise EygendaalDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Paolo ArrigoniLaboratory of Applied Biomechanics, Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8273-9823
ESSKA Elbow and Wrist Committee 2016–2018

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCorrect sizing is challenging in radial head replacement and no consensus exists on the implant's optimal height and width to avoid elbow stiffness and instability. Studies exists, suggesting how to appropriately choose the implant size, but the manner by which the fracture pattern influences the surgeons' operative choices was not investigated.

methodsThe radial heads of four fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were excised, measured, and fractured to simulate four patterns: three fragments (A); four fragments (B); comminuted (C); comminuted with bone loss (D). Nine examiners were asked to indicate first the maximum diameter of the radial heads with the help of dedicated sizing dishes and then the appropriate implant size with trial implants. Accuracy and precision were determined. A coefficient of variation was calculated and agreement was evaluated with the Bland-Altman method.

resultsAccuracy and precision of radial head diameter estimation with dedicated sizing dish were 96.73% and 93.64%, (best pattern, D; worst, C). Accuracy and precision of radial head diameter estimation with trial implants were 99.71% and 90.66% (best pattern, A; worst, D). Frequent modifications occurred between the initial radial head size proposal based on the sizing dish and the radial head size chosen after use of the trial implants (47.2%).

conclusionsDiameter estimation of radial heads with dedicated sizing dishes may be underestimated in comminuted fractures; when bone loss is present, this may lead to an overestimation, especially when using trial implants. Care is essential to determine the optimal size of the implant and to avoid overlenghtening and oversizing, which can be responsible for implant failure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knowledge of the manner by which the fracture pattern influences radial head replacement size estimation can help preventing overlenghtening and oversizing during this procedure.

Indexed as

AgreementAnatomical studyElbowFractureProsthesisRadial headReplacement

Identifiers

PMID32843951
PMCPMC7429655

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.