Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36287106›Full record

ReviewEFORT open reviews2022

Defining acute Essex-Lopresti injuries is problematic and variable: a systematic review.

B Kooistra, M van den Bekerom, S Priester-Vink, R Barco

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EFORT open reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

B KooistraDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medische Kliniek Velsen, Velsen-Noord, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3075-3735
M van den BekeromDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
S Priester-VinkDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
R BarcoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
OLVG · NLHospital Universitario La Paz · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to systematically review clinical studies on the employed definitions of longitudinal forearm instabilities referred to as Essex-Lopresti (EL) injuries, interosseous membrane (IOM) injuries or longitudinal radioulnar dissociation. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane databases, adhering to PRISMA guidelines. All data on diagnosis and treatment were collected. Results: In total, 47 clinical studies involving 266 patients were included. Thirty-nine of 47 studies did not mention an IOM lesion as part of the EL injury. The amount of preoperative positive ulnar variance varied from >1 to >12 mm. Nine studies used some form of dynamic pre-operative or intraoperative test of longitudinal radioulnar instability. Conclusions: There is no accepted definition of EL injury in the literature. In order to prevent underdetection of acute EL injury, a radial head fracture in a patient with wrist and/or forearm pain should raise awareness of the possibility of an EL injury. In this case, comparative radiographic studies and some form of dynamic assessment of longitudinal radioulnar stability should be performed.

Indexed as

Essex-Loprestiforearm instabilitylongitudinal radioulnar dissociation

Identifiers

PMID36287106
PMCPMC9619391
OpenAlexW4307432870

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.