Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38033925›Full record

ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction

Trends and Practices in Limb Lengthening: An 11-year US Database Study.

Ashish Mittal, Sachin Allahabadi, Rishab Jayaram, Abhinav Nalluri, Matt Callahan, Sanjeev Sabharwal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 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.

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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. What's new in pediatric lower limb reconstruction?Journal of children's orthopaedics · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Ashish MittalDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Mary's Medical Center, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Sachin AllahabadiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1185-3039
Rishab JayaramDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York, United States of America.
Abhinav NalluriDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, St. Mary's Medical Center, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Matt CallahanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Sanjeev SabharwalDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, San Francisco; UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital, Oakland, California, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3779-1419

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aim: Over the past couple of decades, limb lengthening has evolved to encompass various implants and techniques. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine trends in the utilisation of various limb lengthening techniques for the femur and tibia in the United States, (2) determine trends in 1-year readmission rate following limb lengthening procedures and (3) to study the relationship of limb lengthening implant used and payment method used with the underlying diagnosis associated with limb shortening. Materials and methods: Inpatient data were acquired using the Healthcare Cost and Utilisation Project (HCUP) database from 2005 to 2015 from seven states in the United States. Patients with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 code for limb lengthening of the femur or tibia were included. A total of 2,563 patients were included. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and chi-square test was used for comparison of subcategories. Linear regression analysis was used to examine trends over time. Results: There was a strong linear trend towards increasing proportional use of internal lengthening of the femur from 2011 to 2015 ( Conclusion: There was increasing use of internal lengthening techniques from 2011 to 2015. Patients with short stature had higher use of internal lengthening technique and self-pay for payment method. Clinical significance: Intramedullary devices have seen increasing use for limb lengthening procedures. Lengthening technique and payment method may differ by underlying diagnosis. How to cite this article: Mittal A, Allahabadi S, Jayaram R,

Indexed as

Distraction osteogenesisExternal fixator lengtheningHybrid lengtheningIntramedullary lengtheningLengthening nailLimb lengtheningMotorised implantable nailShort stature

Identifiers

PMID38033925
PMCPMC10682549

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.