Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37078245›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2023

Primary Cooperative Application of a LARS® Tube and 3D-Printed Prosthesis for Reconstruction of the Distal Radius after en bloc Resection of Giant Cell Tumor of Bone: A Comparative Retrospective Study.

Xianhao Shao, Hao Ding, Jianmin Li, Zhaorui Lv, Qiang Yang, Qing Chu, Ka Li, Zhenfeng Li

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Application of custom-made joint prostheses in wrist.Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Xianhao ShaoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6044-9959
Hao DingDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Jianmin LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Zhaorui LvDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Qiang YangDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Qing ChuState Key Laboratory of Cardiovascular Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Centre for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Ka LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.
Zhenfeng LiDepartment of Orthopaedics, Qilu Hospital, Cheeloo College of Medicine, Shandong University, Jinan, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6136-4428
Qilu Hospital of Shandong University · CNChinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CNShandong Provincial Hospital · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 82100323
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveUsing a fibula autograft (FA) to reconstruct defects after en bloc resection of giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) in the distal radius is classic but has high complication rates. We describe a novel reconstruction method employing the cooperative application of LARS® and a 3D-printed prosthesis (L-P) and investigate whether it improves postoperative outcomes.

methodsFrom April 2015 to August 2022, 14 patients who underwent the cooperative L-P reconstruction method after en bloc resection of distal radial GCTBs and 31 patients who received FA reconstruction were enrolled as two retrospective cohorts in this comparative study. The properties of the implants and critical surgical techniques were elaborated in the L-P group. Preoperative function, intraoperative data, and postoperative clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes of all patients were recorded and compared between the two groups. The grip strength and range of wrist motion, including extension, flexion, radial deviation, and ulnar deviation, were measured. The Mayo modified wrist and Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores were chosen to assess wrist function and surgical functional outcomes, respectively. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to analyze the significant differences in complication rates and implant survival between the two groups.

resultsIn both groups, all 45 patients underwent the operation without complication with similar average osteotomy lengths and bleeding volumes, while a shorter operative duration was achieved in the L-P group (201.43 ± 22.87 min vs. 230.16 ± 51.44 min, P = 0.015). At a mean follow-up of 40.42 ± 18.43 months (range, 14-72 months), both reconstruction methods effectively ameliorated postoperative function. Patients who received L-P showed higher postoperative modified Mayo wrist scores (81.43 ± 5.49 vs. 71.13 ± 16.10, P = 0.003), Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores (27.64 ± 1.34 vs. 25.06 ± 2.95, P = 0.004), and grip strength on the normal side (68.71% ± 8.00% vs. 57.81% ± 12.31%, P = 0.005) than the FA group. Better wrist extension (63.21° ± 8.99° vs. 45.32° ± 14.53°, P < 0.001) and flexion (45.36° ± 7.90° vs. 30.48° ± 12.07°, P < 0.001) were also observed in the L-P group. The complication rate was significantly higher in the FA group (29/31, 93.55%) than in the L-P group (1/14 7.14%, P < 0.001). The L-P group showed higher implant survival than the FA group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

conclusionThe cooperative application of LARS® and 3D-printed prostheses is an effective modality for reconstructing musculoskeletal defects after en bloc resection of distal radial GCTBs, which can improve functional outcomes, diminish complication rates, and promote wrist joint stability and motion.

Indexed as

Bone NeoplasmsGiant Cell Tumor of BoneFollow-Up StudiesHumansPrinting, Three-DimensionalProstheses and ImplantsRadiusRange of Motion, ArticularRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeWrist Joint3D-printed prosthesisDistal radiusFibula autograftGiant cell tumor of boneLigament advanced reinforcement system

Identifiers

PMID37078245
PMCPMC10235188
OpenAlexW4366463316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.