Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35091802›Full record

ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2022

[Salvage options following failed total ankle arthroplasty].

T Buchhorn, S F Baumbach, W Böcker, D Szymski, H Polzer

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

T BuchhornSporthopädicum Straubing-Regensburg-Berlin, 94315, Straubing, Deutschland.
S F BaumbachKlinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Muskuloskelettales Universitätszentrum München (MUM), Klinikum der Universität München, LMU München, Ziemssenstr. 5, 80336, München, Deutschland.
W BöckerKlinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Muskuloskelettales Universitätszentrum München (MUM), Klinikum der Universität München, LMU München, Ziemssenstr. 5, 80336, München, Deutschland.
D SzymskiSporthopädicum Straubing-Regensburg-Berlin, 94315, Straubing, Deutschland.
H PolzerKlinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Muskuloskelettales Universitätszentrum München (MUM), Klinikum der Universität München, LMU München, Ziemssenstr. 5, 80336, München, Deutschland. hans.polzer@med.uni-muenchen.de.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEUniversity Hospital Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of patients with osteoarthritis of the ankle, which are treated by arthroplasty, has continuously increased in recent years. The survival time of these implants is far below the results following hip and knee arthroplasty. In some cases a failure rate of approximately 1% per year or a survival rate of 70% after 10 years has been reported. The most frequent reasons for revision of an ankle prosthesis are aseptic loosening, technical implantation errors and persisting pain. For the revision of an ankle prosthesis there are basically two treatment options. For a long time, ankle arthrodesis was considered the gold standard after a failed prosthesis. In recent years, there has been an increasing trend towards re-implantation of an ankle prosthesis, as this preserves the functionality and mobility of the ankle joint as far as possible. Depending on the reason for failure and the size of the bony defect, a decision must be made regarding a one-stage and a two-stage procedure with bone augmentation. This article presents the advantages and disadvantages of arthrodesis and revision arthroplasty after failed primary ankle arthroplasty and highlights the special features of surgery.

Indexed as

AnkleArthroplasty, Replacement, AnkleAnkle JointArthrodesisHumansProsthesis FailureReoperationAllogeneic transplantationAnkle jointArthrodesisIntramedullary nailingReoperation

Identifiers

PMID35091802
OpenAlexW4210631754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.