Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35032189›Full record

ReviewArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2022

Surgical treatment of the bony mallet thumb: a case series and literature review.

Tobias Kastenberger, Peter Kaiser, Stefan Benedikt, Kerstin Stock, Magdalena Eigl, Gernot Schmidle, Rohit Arora

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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.

Tobias KastenbergerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Peter KaiserDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Stefan BenediktDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Kerstin StockDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Magdalena EiglDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Gernot SchmidleDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
Rohit AroraDepartment of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstr. 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. rohit.arora@tirol-kliniken.at.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4843-7303

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of this study was to provide a more precise statement on the outcome after surgical treatment of a bony mallet thumb and possibly give a treatment recommendation regarding the surgical fixation method. PATIENTS AND

methodsAll patients (n = 16) who underwent a surgical treatment for an acute bony mallet thumb fracture between January 2006 and July 2019 were enrolled. The surgical method, complications, the range of motion, tip pinch, lateral key pinch, overall grip strength, visual analog score, Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score, Mayo Wrist Score, Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation Score, Buck-Gramcko Score and radiologic parameters were evaluated. Further, a comprehensive literature search on PubMed was conducted covering a period from 1956 to 2021 to include all possible matching articles on the treatment of the bony mallet thumb (n = 21 articles).

resultsSurgical treatment was very inhomogenous including indirect and direct K-wire fixation, screw fixation, plate fixation and anchor fixation methods. The IP joint range of motion and thumb strength ranged from 66 to 94% in comparison to the contralateral side. An open reduction led to worse functional scores compared to a closed reduction. Treatment methods in the literature were also very inhomogenous with a very low patient count, often even pooling data of bony mallet thumb fractures with bony mallet finger fractures. The risk for infection was higher in K-wire fixation methods than in open reduction and internal fixation methods.

conclusionThe evidence for the best treatment of a bony mallet thumb fracture is low. On one hand the functional outcome can be inferior using an open reduction approach, but on the other hand, K-wire fixation methods with a closed reduction approach showed a higher risk for infection. Future multi-center research must be conducted to find the best treatment procedure for the best outcome of the patient.

Indexed as

Finger InjuriesFractures, BoneTendon InjuriesWrist InjuriesBone PlatesBone WiresFracture Fixation, InternalHumansRange of Motion, ArticularThumbTreatment OutcomeAvulsionFractureMalletTendonThumb

Identifiers

PMID35032189
PMCPMC8994723

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.