Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32899725›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Is There a Role for Absorbable Metals in Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Mg/Mg Alloy Based Implants.

Cortino Sukotjo, Tiburtino J Lima-Neto, Joel Fereira Santiago Júnior, Leonardo P Faverani, Michael Miloro

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Bioactive materials · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Cortino SukotjoDepartment of Restorative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2171-004X
Tiburtino J Lima-NetoOral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Diagnosis and Surgery, Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University-Unesp, Araçatuba, São Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-8297-4057
Joel Fereira Santiago JúniorDepartment of Health Sciences, Centro Universitário Sagrado Coração-UNISAGRADO, Bauru, São Paulo 16011-160, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-1735-2224
Leonardo P FaveraniDepartment of Diagnosis and Surgery, Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Implantology, School of Dentistry, São Paulo State University-Unesp, Araçatuba, São Paulo 16015-050, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0003-2249-3048
Michael MiloroDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dentistry, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) · BRUniversity of Illinois Chicago · USUniversidade Sagrado Coração · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Magnesium (Mg) alloys have received attention in the literature as potential biomaterials for use as absorbable implants in oral and maxillofacial and orthopedic surgery applications. This study aimed to evaluate the available clinical studies related to patients who underwent bone fixation (patients), and received conventional fixation (intervention), in comparison to absorbable metals (comparison), in terms of follow-up and complications (outcomes). A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed in accordance with the PRISMA statement and PROSPERO (CRD42020188654), PICO question, ROBINS-I, and ROB scales. The relative risk (RR) of complications and failures were calculated considering a confidence interval (CI) of 95%. Eight studies (three randomized clinical trial (RCT), one retrospective studies, two case-control studies, and two prospective studies) involving 468 patients, including 230 Mg screws and 213 Titanium (Ti) screws, were analyzed. The meta-analysis did not show any significant differences when comparing the use of Mg and Ti screws for complications (

Indexed as

absorbable implantsbone surgerymagnesium (Mg)oral and maxillofacialorthopedictitanium (Ti)

Identifiers

PMID32899725
PMCPMC7558106
OpenAlexW3083512110

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.