Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37834927›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2023

Current Management of Diaphyseal Long Bone Defects-A Multidisciplinary and International Perspective.

Steffen Bernd Rosslenbroich, Chang-Wug Oh, Thomas Kern, John Mukhopadhaya, Michael Johannes Raschke, Ulrich Kneser, Christian Krettek

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06923579 (Treatment Of Meta-diaphyseal Bone Defect In Long Bone With Titanium Mesh Cage), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06923579 not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Treatment Of Meta-diaphyseal Bone Defect In Long Bone With Titanium Mesh Cage : Case Series Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorAssiut UniversityRan2025 to 2028Enrolled20ConditionsMeta-diaphyseal Bone Defect In Long BoneArmsTitanium Mesh Cage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Bone Bridge Transtibial Amputation by an Innovative Technique.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024
    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

7 authors.

Steffen Bernd RosslenbroichDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, 48149 Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0925-7665
Chang-Wug OhDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Kyungpook National University Hospital, Jung-gu, Daegu 41944, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1224-0787
Thomas KernDepartment of Trauma Surgery/Murnau, BG Unfallklinik Murnau, 82418 Murnau am Staffelsee, Germany.
John MukhopadhayaOrthopedic and Trauma Department, Paras HMRI Hospital, Patna 800014, Bihar, India.
Michael Johannes RaschkeDepartment of Trauma, Hand and Reconstructive Surgery, University Hospital Muenster, 48149 Münster, Germany.
Ulrich KneserBG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department of Plastic Surgery, University of Heidelberg/Ludwigshafen, 67059 Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3402-2860
Christian KrettekTrauma Department/Hannover, Hannover Medical School, 30625 Hannover, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The treatment of defects of the long bones remains one of the biggest challenges in trauma and orthopedic surgery. The treatment path is usually very wearing for the patient, the patient's environment and the treating physician. The clinical or regional circumstances, the defect etiology and the patient´s condition and mental status define the treatment path chosen by the treating surgeon. Depending on the patient´s demands, the bony reconstruction has to be taken into consideration at a defect size of 2-3 cm, especially in the lower limbs. Below this defect size, acute shortening or bone grafting is usually preferred. A thorough assessment of the patient´s condition including comorbidities in a multidisciplinary manner and her or his personal demands must be taken into consideration. Several techniques are available to restore continuity of the long bone. In general, these techniques can be divided into repair techniques and reconstructive techniques. The aim of the repair techniques is anatomical restoration of the bone with differentiation of the cortex and marrow. Currently, classic, hybrid or all-internal distraction devices are technical options. However, they are all based on distraction osteogenesis. Reconstructive techniques restore long-bone continuity by replacing the defect zone with autologous bone, e.g., with a vascularized bone graft or with the technique described by Masquelet. Allografts for defect reconstruction in long bones might also be described as possible options. Due to limited access to allografts in many countries and the authors' opinion that allografts result in poorer outcomes, this review focuses on autologous techniques and gives an internationally aligned overview of the current concepts in repair or reconstruction techniques of segmental long-bone defects.

Indexed as

all-internal distractionbone defectcallus distractionIlizarov

Identifiers

PMID37834927
PMCPMC10573364

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.