ArticleCureus2023
A Single-Center Comparative Study: Outcome Analysis of Fixation Techniques for Tibiotalocalcaneal Arthrodesis.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis (TTCA) is a well-known and accepted surgical technique for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis. The aim of this study is to compare the postoperative clinical and radiological comparison of retrograde intramedullary nailing (RIMN) and plate/cannulated screw (P/cS) fixation methods in patients undergoing TTCA. Methods Patients with end-stage ankle osteoarthritis due to traumatic causes or rheumatic diseases between December 2012 and March 2019 were included in the retrospective study. Patients who underwent isolated tibiotalar or isolated subtalar arthrodesis were not included in the study. Functional scores of patients with bone fusion were evaluated using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and Short Form-36 (SF-36) quality of life score surveys, administered either in person or by phone. From the radiological point of view, it was evaluated whether the union was achieved with the two-view ankle radiograph. There were 48 patients who underwent ankle arthrodesis in the clinical archive. A total of 31 patients were excluded from the study due to failure to attend follow-up, inability to be reached, or non-compliance with study criteria. The mean age of the patients participating in the study was 44.12 ± 12.95 years, the follow-up time was 40.06 ± 27.31 months, the union time was 5.19 ± 3.17 months, and the AOFAS score was 53.12 ± 13.87. SF-36 scores were evaluated among their own subunits. Results A total of 17 patients were enrolled in the study, of whom 13 were male (76.47%) and 4 were female (23.53%). There was no significant effect of the fixation methods (RIMN or P/cS) selected for TTCA on union times (p>0.05). However, there were significant differences in some parameters of the SF-36 when compared by gender. According to this, the scores of men in physical function (PF), mental health (MH), and general health perception (GHP) were higher than those of women. When AOFAS and SF-36 scores were compared by fixation type, no statistically significant difference was found (p>0.05). Conclusion This study investigated the impact of the fixation method on clinical and radiological outcomes in TTCA. We found that both methods were clinically similar in terms of bone union time and surgical efficacy. However, men had better physical function, mental health, and general health perception after TTCA than women.
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.