ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2023
The patient-related factors in revision procedures on tibia of patients with osteogenesis imperfecta treated with the Peter-Williams nail.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Telescopic rods vs. non-telescopic rods in the treatment of osteogenesis imperfecta: A systematic review.Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Surgical management strategies and clinical outcomes of cutaneous skeletal hypophosphatemia syndrome: a case series.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the patient-related factors that affect the revision rate for the tibia in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta treated with the Peter-Williams nail, and to explore the relationship between the risk factors and complications postsurgery.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the data of 211 patients (93 females (44.08%) and 118 males (55.92%)) with osteogenesis imperfecta treated with Peter-Williams. The factors affecting surgical revision were analysed by performing binary logistic regression. Then, a total of 211 patients with type III, type I or type IV OI were divided into five groups according to the results of regression. Statistical comparison of these groups was performed to further investigate the relationship between patient-related factors and revision procedures. Statistical comparison was also performed to analyse the relationship between the classification and postoperative complications.
resultsAmong the 211 patients who underwent surgery, 40 had type I OI, 109 had type IV OI, and 62 had type III OI. Binary logistic regression revealed that the classification (OR = 3.32, 95% CI 1.06-10.39, P = 0.039) and initial operation age (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.76-0.92, P < 0.001) were significantly correlated with revision procedures. In type III patients, the initial operation age was significantly correlated with revision procedures (P < 0.001), and the revision rate was lower in patients aged 9 to12 years (P = 0.001). In type I and IV patients, the initial operation age was not significantly correlated with revision procedures (P = 0.281). Classification had a significant effect on postoperative deformity (P = 0.003).
conclusionsThe study reported that the age of initial surgery and classification were the influencing factors affecting the revision procedures of tibia in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta treated with the Peter-Williams nail. In patients with type III disease, the revision rate was lower individuals aged 9-12 years old, and a higher incidence of postoperative deformity was observed.
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.