ArticleCureus2024
Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy in Upper Limb Crush Injury: Why and When?
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adjunctive Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy for Severe Traumatic Limb Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Antioxidant Upregulation Contributes to Improvements in Diaphragm Function Following Cervical Spinal Cord Injury and Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction In 2016, the European Committee for Hyperbaric Medicine strongly recommended hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) adjunctive to surgery in post-traumatic crush injuries, initiating as rapidly as possible. For the last 30 years, HBOT has been used in crush injury, but in most cases as a last resort, after skin flaps necrosis or wound bed infection, diminishing its potential benefits as a complementary treatment. It is, therefore, essential to understand how HBOT modulates the outcome of crush injury, and when to use it, since this can be a significant and underused therapeutic weapon that may alter the natural course of these patients. Methods Nineteen (n=19) adult patients with upper limb crush injuries underwent adjunctive HBOT, after the initial surgical approach. The measured outcomes included trauma-related acute complications (tissue necrosis and local infection), and late complications (pseudarthrosis and late deep infection). Results Only six (n=6) patients started HBOT in the first 24 hours. Four (n=4) patients presented acute complications; in half of those cases (n=2), HBOT was initiated more than 24 hours post-injury. Late complications were observed in three patients, none of which had initiated HBOT in the first 24 hours post-injury. Conclusions Either lack of awareness or logistic difficulties, preclude initiating timely HBOT, limiting its potential benefits. It is important to alert all practitioners to the right timing to initiate HBOT in order to improve these patients' outcomes.
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.