Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34430880›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021

Tibial Spine Repair in the Pediatric Population: Outcomes and Subsequent Injury Rates.

Noah J Quinlan, Taylor E Hobson, Alexander J Mortensen, Kelly M Tomasevich, Temitope Adeyemi, Travis G Maak, Stephen K Aoki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Noah J QuinlanDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Taylor E HobsonDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Alexander J MortensenSchool of Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.
Kelly M TomasevichDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Temitope AdeyemiDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Travis G MaakDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Stephen K AokiDepartment of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
University of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate short- to mid-term outcomes after arthroscopic operative fixation of tibial spine fractures in pediatric patients, to determine the incidence of further ipsilateral and contralateral knee injuries, and to describe associated meniscal pathology and intraoperative findings at the time of tibial spine repair.

methodsAll patients under age 18 with a tibial spine fracture treated arthroscopically at 1 institution by 2 surgeons from 2008 through 2019 were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Patients at least 1 year from their date of surgery were contacted to complete a questionnaire, which included the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form. Questions pertained to knee function, pain, and further injury or surgery on either knee. Patient charts, preoperative imaging, and operative reports were reviewed to determine demographic information, tibial spine fracture type, concomitant injuries, and intraoperative details.

resultsSixty-six of 97 eligible patients (68%) completed questionnaires. Average age at initial surgery was 10.7 years (range, 4-17). Mean follow-up was 5.8 years (range, 1.0-11.9). Average IKDC score at follow-up was 91.4 (range, 62.1-100). Patients reported their knee as 92% of "normal" (range, 40-100). Thirty-five (53%) currently participate in sport; 6 (9%) remain limited because of instability and residual pain. Regarding pain on a visual analog scale, 94%, 95%, and 83% of patients reported less than a 3 at rest, with daily activity, and with sport, respectively. Seven patients (11%) had subsequent ACL rupture. Six patients (9%) underwent ACL reconstruction 3.1 years (range, 0.9-7) after initial repair. Fourteen patients (21%) required at least 1 additional procedure. Regarding the contralateral knee, there were no ACL or tibial spine injuries. Sixty-one (92%) patients were both satisfied and would definitely undergo the procedure again.

conclusionsAlthough many pediatric patients demonstrate excellent results after tibial spine repair at mean 5.8 years follow-up, 10.6% sustained an ipsilateral ACL rupture, and 21% required an additional procedure. No patient had a contralateral tibial spine or ACL injury. This is helpful when counseling patients regarding injury risk when returning to activity after tibial spine repair. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Identifiers

PMID34430880
PMCPMC8365202
OpenAlexW3171905435

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.