Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37367227›Full record

ReviewAnnals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England2025

A review of the Masquelet technique in the treatment of lower limb critical-size bone defects.

H Ahmed, M Shakshak, A Trompeter

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Custom 3D implants for managing bone defects-indications and lessons learned.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Basic science and current management for fracture-related infections.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

H AhmedSt George's, University of London, UK.
M ShakshakSt George's, University of London, UK.
A TrompeterSt George's, University of London, UK.
St George's, University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The need for bone tissue to heal effectively is paramount given its role in the mechanical support of tissues. Bone has a very good natural healing potential in comparison with most other tissue types, largely regenerating to its pre-injury state in the vast majority of cases. Certain factors such as high energy trauma, tumour resection, revision surgery, developmental deformities and infection can lead to the formation of bone defects, where the intrinsic healing potential of bone is diminished owing to bone loss. Various approaches to resolving bone defects exist in current practice, each with their respective benefits and drawbacks. These include bone grafting, free tissue transfer, Ilizarov bone transport and the Masquelet induced membrane technique. This review focuses on evaluating the Masquelet technique, discussing its method and underlying mechanisms, the effectiveness of certain modifications, and its potential future directions.

Indexed as

Bone TransplantationLower ExtremityHumansIlizarov TechniqueBone defectsCritical sizeGraftInduced membraneMasquelet

Identifiers

PMID37367227
PMCPMC12208741
OpenAlexW4382132659

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.