ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2023
Comparison of two surgical techniques for Lisfranc injuries; closed reduction and fixation versus primary partial arthrodesis.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Lisfranc Sports Injuries: What Do We Know So Far?Cureus · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study reviewed the outcomes of Lisfranc injuries treated by primary partial arthrodesis (PPA) or closed re-duction and internal fixation (CRIF).
methodsA retrospective review was made of patients who underwent PPA or CRIF for a Lisfranc injury after low-energy trauma, and follow-up was assessed according to radiographic, and clinical outcomes. A total of 45 patients with a median age of 38 years were followed up for an average of 47 months.
resultsThe average American orthopaedic foot and ankle society (AOFAS) score was 83.6 points in the PPA group and 86.2 points in CRIF group (p>0.05). The mean pain score was 32.9 in the PPA group, 33.7 in the CRIF group (p>0.05). Secondary surgery for symptomatic hardware was required in 78% of the CRIF group and in 42% of the PPA group (p<0.05).
conclusionTreatment of low-energy Lisfranc injuries with either PPA or closed reduction and fixation produced good clinical and radiological outcomes. The total AOFAS scores were comparable between two groups. However, the function and pain scores were seen to improve more with closed reduction and fixation while there was a greater requirement for secondary surgery in the CRIF group.
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.