ArticleActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2022
Relapse in surgically treated clubfoot: treatment approach and midterm results of revision surgery.
Article in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimThe rate of recurrence of surgically early treated clubfoot is around 25% and the treatment of clubfoot recurrence remains debated. The aim of the study is to report a case series of 15 patients (16 feet) surgically treated for relapse of surgically treated clubfoot.
methodsA careful clinical and radiological evaluation of each deformity was made. The treatment algorithm was based on the pathological anatomy of the relapse, on the patient's age and on the use of a combination of surgical steps involving bones, soft tissue or both.
resultsThe average age of patients at the time of relapse treatment was 8 years and 6 months, with an average follow-up of 2 years. The average Avatar score was 77 (good result). The 16 feet submitted to evaluation obtained the following scores: 6 excellent, 4 good, 4 mediocre and 2 poor.
conclusionsThe number of previous interventions does not seem to be related to the outcome. The clinical and radiological evaluation of the deformity is the most important step for the right application of the algorithm. The use of a treatment approach based on age and on the systematic treatment of bony and soft tissues leads to reproducible clinical results with functional improvement.
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.