Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35036344›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2021

Arthroscopic

Federico Morelli, Giorgio Princi, Matteo Romano Cantagalli, Marco Rossini, Ludovico Caperna, Daniele Mazza, Andrea Ferretti

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Federico MorelliDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Giorgio PrinciDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy. giorgioprinci@gmail.com.
Matteo Romano CantagalliDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Marco RossiniDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Ludovico CapernaDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Daniele MazzaDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Andrea FerrettiDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Sapienza University of Rome, Roma 00189, Italy.
Sapienza University of Rome · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe osteoarthritis of the ankle, although less common than other joints, is associated with severe functional limitation. Surgical options are ankle arthroscopic debridement, osteotomies, ankle arthrodesis and ankle arthroplasty. Ankle arthroplasty is increasingly used thanks to the new implants design, but ankle arthrodesis still represents the most used technique and it can be performed arthroscopically or with an open procedure.

aimTo compare mid-term results of arthroscopic

methodsThis study enrolled 23 patients, which underwent ankle arthrodesis. The patients were divided into 2 groups: group A (open procedure;

resultsPatients in the arthroscopic group showed better results at six-month follow-up compared to the open group at the AOFAS (group A, 62.2; group B, 78.5;

conclusionThe arthroscopic and the open arthrodesis are valid and safe options for the treatment of ankle arthritis on the basis of clinical outcomes at 7 years follow-up. Moreover, the arthroscopic treatment shows faster improvement at six-month follow-up in comparison with the open group.

Indexed as

AnkleArthrodesisArthroplastyArthroscopyOsteoarthritisSurgery

Identifiers

PMID35036344
PMCPMC8696599
OpenAlexW4200313676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.