ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2023
Is immediate internal fixation safe in induced membrane technique?
Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of the induced membrane technique in aseptic and infected long-bone defect management: Are there any differences?World journal of orthopedics · 2025Review
- Marginal bone resection and immediate internal fixation in multidrug resistant chronic septic nonunions of lower limb long bones: a case series.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the treatment outcomes of patients treated with induced membrane technique (IMT) for the reconstruction of bone defects and to identify factors associated with the success and failure of the modified technique. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween January 2016 and April 2021, a total of 23 adult patients (20 males, 3 females; median age: 39.9 years; range, 20 to 69 years) who underwent bone reconstruction using the IMT for established pseudoarthrosis and acute bone loss were retrospectively analyzed. Fracture type, the size and location of bone defect, the nature of the index injury, the type of fixation, the interval between stages of the operation, and any diagnosis of infection or other complications of the patients were assessed.
resultsThe median bone union was achieved in 6.6 (range, 4 to 11) months. The median index of reconstruction was 19 (range, 10 to 30%). The main complications were recurrent infection in two cases and nonunion in one case. Massive graft resorption occurred in two cases.
conclusionImmediate internal fixation is a reliable and effective method in the treatment of complex bone defects. A large volume of autograft is required for the reconstruction of long defects, which presents as a limiting factor, particularly in patients undergoing previous surgical interventions.
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.