ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2024
Double reverse traction repositor assisted closed reduction and internal fixation versus open reduction and internal fixation for treatment of lateral tibial plateau fractures among the elderly.
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn elderly tibial plateau fractures (TPFs), the lateral condyles are involved frequently. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and double reverse traction repositor (DRTR) assisted closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) in elderly patients with lateral TPFs.
methodsFrom January 2015 to July 2020, we retrospectively reviewed 68 patients treated surgically at our trauma center for lateral TPFs (Schatzker type I-III). 31 patients were eventually assigned to the DRTR assisted CRIF group, whereas 37 patients were assigned to the ORIF group. The primary outcomes included surgical details, radiological assessment, follow-up knee function, and complications.
resultsThe DRTR assisted CRIF group experienced a 43.6 mL decrease in intraoperative blood loss (161.3 ml vs 204.9 ml, p = 0.033), and the operation duration was 32.1 min shorter than the ORIF group (83.8 min vs 115.9 min, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of widening of the tibia plateau (WTP), depth of articular depression (DAD), medial proximal tibial angle (MPTA) and posterior tibial slope angle (PTSA) immediately after surgery and at the last follow-up. No differences in malreduction (p = 0.566) or reduction loss (p = 0.623) were observed between the groups, and Lysholm and HSS scores were similar between the two groups (83.6 ± 15.8 vs 83.4 ± 5.1, p = 0.934; 89.3 ± 7.8 vs 86.9 ± 6.2, p = 0.172; respectively). However, ORIF was associated with a greater increase in postoperative complications than DRTR assisted CRIF (3.2% vs 27%, p = 0.008).
conclusionBoth types of internal fixation provide good radiological outcomes and knee function in the treatment of lateral TPFs in the elderly. However, DRTR assisted CRIF has the advantage of a shorter duration of surgery, less blood loss, and fewer postoperative complications, and appears to be a better treatment option for elderly patients with lateral TPFs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38789856What 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.