Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37445272›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Matched-Pair Analysis: Large-Sized Defects in Surgery of Lower Limb Nonunions.

Sebastian Findeisen, Melanie Schwilk, Patrick Haubruck, Thomas Ferbert, Lars Helbig, Matthias Miska, Gerhard Schmidmaier, Michael Christopher Tanner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Sebastian FindeisenUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Melanie SchwilkUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Patrick HaubruckUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Thomas FerbertUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Lars HelbigUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Matthias MiskaUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Gerhard SchmidmaierUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6711-7380
Michael Christopher TannerUniversity Hospital Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Center for Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Paraplegiology, Schlierbacher Landstraße 200a, 69118 Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe treatment of large-sized bone defects remains a major challenge in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Although there are many treatment options, there is still no clear guidance on surgical management, and the influence of defect size on radiological and clinical outcome remains unclear due to the small number of affected patients. The aim of the present study was to determine the influence of defect size on the outcome of atrophic and infected nonunions of the tibia or the femur based on the diamond concept in order to provide recommendations for treatment guidance. PATIENTS AND

methodsAll medical records, surgical reports, laboratory data and radiological images of patients treated surgically for atrophic or infected nonunions of the lower limbs (femur or tibia) between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2020 were examined. Patients with proximal, diaphyseal or distal nonunions of the femur or tibia who were surgically treated at our institution according to the "diamond concept" and attended our standardised follow-up program were included in a database. Surgical treatment was performed as a one- or two-step procedure, depending on the type of nonunion. Patients with a segmental bone defect ≥5 cm were matched with patients suffering a bone defect <5 cm based on five established criteria. According to our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 70 patients with a bone defect ≥5 cm were suitable for analysis. Two groups were formed by matching: the study group (bone defect ≥5 cm; n = 39) and control group (bone defect <5 cm; n = 39). The study was approved by the local ethics committee (S-262/2017).

resultsThe mean defect size was 7.13 cm in the study and 2.09 cm in the control group. The chi-square test showed equal consolidation rates between the groups (SG: 53.8%; CG: 66.7%). However, the Kaplan-Meier curve and log-rank test showed a significant difference regarding the mean duration until consolidation was achieved, with an average of 15.95 months in the study and 9.24 months in the control group (α = 0.05,

conclusionSurprisingly, defect size does not seem to have a significant effect on the consolidation rate and should not be seen as a risk factor. However, for the treatment of large-sized nonunions, the follow-up period should be prolonged up to 24 months, due to the extended time until consolidation will be achieved. This period should also pass before a premature revision with new bone augmentation is performed. In addition, it should be kept in mind that as the number of previous surgeries and revisions increases, the prospects for consolidation decrease and a change in therapeutic approach may be required.

Indexed as

diamond conceptMasquelet techniquenonunionnonunion therapysegmental bone defect

Identifiers

PMID37445272
PMCPMC10342412
OpenAlexW4382135964

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.