ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
Bone Transport with the Taylor Spatial Frame Technique: A Case Series.
Article in Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction. 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.
- Eccentric Hexapod external fixator assisted closed reduction and intramedullary nail fixation for the treatment of femoral shaft fractures.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Current Strategies for Limb Salvage and Reconstruction in Pediatric Lower Extremity Malignant Bone Tumors: Focus on Growth Preservation and Functional Outcomes.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
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
Aim: Bone transport is a beneficial reconstructive method for bone defects caused by infected non-unions or bone tumours. The Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) is a three-dimensional corrective external fixator that can be used to achieve bone transport and correct any residual deformities easily at any time. This study reports the results of bone transport using TSF. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study of ten patients who underwent bone transport using the TSF. The mean age was 32.3 years; the femur was affected in one case and the lower leg in nine. Bone defects were due to infected non-unions in seven cases and bone tumours in three. The duration of external fixation, bone transport distance, distraction index (DI), alignment at the end of correction, leg length discrepancy, and complications were investigated. Results: The average bone transport distance was 76.0 mm. The external fixation period averaged 367 days with the DI at 20.8 days/cm. Deformity at the docking site was assessed to have an average 2.6° deformity and 2.0 mm translation in the frontal view, as well as 3.3° deformity and 3.7 mm translation in the lateral view. The mean leg length discrepancy was 10.9 mm and the percentage of the mechanical axis (%MA) was 40.6%. Four patients underwent plate conversion after correction and two required additional surgery for non-union at the docking site. Bone union was achieved in all patients and there was no reaggravation of infection or tumour recurrence. Conclusion: The TSF allowed for the correction of deformities and translations that occurred during bone transport giving excellent results. However, as with bone transport using this or other devices, additional procedures are often needed to obtain consolidation or docking site union. How to cite this article: Shimokawa K, Matsubara H, Hikichi T,
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.