ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Refracture-related bone transport of tibia: technical notes and preliminary clinical results in nineteen cases.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Applying 3D-printed prostheses to reconstruct critical-sized bone defects of tibial diaphysis (> 10 cm) caused by osteomyelitis and aseptic non-union.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRefracture is one of the main complications of bone transport, which brings additional physical and mental burden to surgeries and patients. We aimed to raise a new classification system of refracture-related bone transport based on the Simpson classification and to present our experience on treatment.
methodsThis retrospective analysis included 19 patients with refracture-related bone transport (average age of 37.7 years; 18 men). We developed a modified Simpson classification system to assist decision-making (conservative versus surgical). The ASAMI criteria were used to assess the outcomes at last follow-up.
resultsThe mean follow-up was 12.3 ± 3.2 months. Complete union was achieved in all patients, with no reinfection. Based on the modified Simpson classification, refracture was Ia type (within regeneration area) in three cases, Ib (collapsed fracture at the regeneration area) in one case, Ic (stress fracture) in three cases, II (at the junction between the regenerate and original bone) in one case, III (at the docking site) in nine cases, and V (at distant site) in two cases. Refracture was managed conservatively in six cases and surgically in 13 cases. Average time to bone union was 2.8 ± 1.2 months in the conservative group versus 4.4 ± 1.4 months in the surgery group. Assessment at the final follow-up using the ASAMI criteria revealed excellent bone result in all patients, excellent functional results in six patients (31.6%), and good functional results in 13 patients.
conclusionsThe modified Simpson classification could include refracture at the docking site and stress fracture in the regeneration zone and provide some guidance in determining the appropriate treatment strategy.
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.