ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2021
Concepts in wound irrigation of open fractures: 'Where we came from, and where are we now?
Review 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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tactical use of irrigants in open orthopaedic procedures: 'what to use & when'.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
- Clinical guidelines for complex extremity war wound management: update and consensus using a mixed-method approach.BJS open · 2025Article
- Pulsatile lavage systems and their potential to penetrate soft tissue.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Article
- A Novel In Vitro Scrubber Model for Evaluating Wound Cleansing on Biofilms.Wound repair and regeneration : official publication of the Wound Healing Society [and] the European Tissue Repair SocietyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wound irrigation is described as the flow of a solution through an exposed fracture surface to reduce the microbial colonization, to remove apparent foreign particles and wound exudates. . While recent literature and various in-vitro and in-vivo trials have cleared some clouds of doubt from the mind, it still remains a topic of debate. Normal saline remains the standard irrigation solution as it is non tissue toxic and has the same tonicity as body fluids. The quantity and duration of washing though is not standardized and is the surgeon's choice. This adds to the dilemma in the minds of the surgeon, with the timing of the debridement and the duration of wound irrigation depending on the surgeon's discretion. Future studies should aim to regulate the duration of the wound irrigation besides guiding about the ideal fluid volume to be used for the irrigation. Further, secondary end-points like the duration of hospital stay, rate of infections and use of hospital resources, should be computed to know about the adequacy of the wound debridement and irrigation. Antimicrobial solutions can kill microorganisms in the wound but are toxic to the host tissues as well, which limits their use. In addition, pulsatile (high pressure) lavage has not been seen to increase overall effectiveness. Recent research trials have found cumulative use of innovative solutions like phenols and EDTA along with enzymes to be encouraging though large randomized controlled trials are lacking.
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.