ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2021
Can low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) be used as an alternative to revision surgery for patients with non-unions following fracture fixation?
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound Therapy in Patients With Post-traumatic Delayed Union and Non-union.Cureus · 2022Article
- 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-union is a significant complication of fracture fixation surgery, and can negatively impact a patient's quality of life. Low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) has been used to treat delayed or non-unions previously in the literature. The aim of this study was to determine the success rate of LIPUS treatment in patients with chronic fracture non-unions, and to establish the effect of systemic or local factors on its success.
methodsThis was a retrospective, observational study which included all patients undergoing LIPUS treatment in a single institution. Patients deemed suitable for LIPUS underwent treatment for a period of 6 months from initiation. They were followed up with sequential radiographs to assess union at intervals of 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year. LIPUS treatment was considered to be successful when patients achieved clinical and radiological union, without the need for revision surgery.
resultsA total of 46 patients were included in the study; 8 were lost to follow - up, leaving 38 patients for the final analysis. The mean age of patients was 47.03 ± 19.7 with a male to female ratio of 1.2:1. Union was achieved in 57.89%; the rest underwent revision surgery. There was no significant association between outcomes after LIPUS treatment and patients' age, gender, smoking status or type of non-union. Patients with a small inter-fragment bone gap were more likely to have a successful outcome after LIPUS (p = 0.041). Time to treatment did not have a statistically significant impact on outcomes after LIPUS. Interestingly, all 6 patients with diabetes in the study managed to achieve union after LIPUS.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that LIPUS is not successful in a large proportion of patients with established fracture non-unions. However, it does represent a low risk treatment modality as an alternative to revision surgery, especially for patients with diabetes who have a small inter - fragment bone gap. More research in the form of large randomised controlled trials needs to be carried out to further assess the role of LIPUS in the treatment of non-unions.
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.