ArticleScientific reports2024
Dome versus single-cut osteotomies for correction of long bone deformities-technical considerations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Planning of distal femoral osteotomy - antegrade vs. retrograde miniaci method.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Change of force and lever arm of the hip abductors after subtrochanteric de-/rotational osteotomy.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Accuracy of Combined High Tibial Slope Correction Osteotomy Using 3-Dimensional-Planned Patient-Specific Instrumentation.The American journal of sports medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Corrective osteotomy allows to improve joint loading, pain and function. In complex deformities, the biggest challenge is to define the optimal surgical solution, while considering anatomical, technical and biomechanical factors. While the single-cut osteotomy (SCOT) and focal dome osteotomy (FDO) are well-established treatment options, their mathematical relationship remain largely unclear. The aim of the study was (1) to describe the close mathematical relationship between the SCOT and FDO and (2) to analyze and introduce a novel technique-the stepped FDO-as a modification of the classic FDO. The mathematical background and relationship of SCOT and FDO are described for the example of a femoral deformity correction and visualized using a 3D surface model taking into account the benefits for the clinical application. The novel modifications of the stepped FDO are introduced and its technical and clinical feasibility demonstrated. Both, SCOT and FDO, rely on the same deformity axis that defines the rotation axis k for a 3D deformity correction. To achieve the desired correction using a SCOT, the resulting cutting plane is perpendicular to k, while using a FDO will result in a cylindrical cut with a central axis parallel to k. The SCOT and FDO demonstrate a strong mathematical relation, as both methods rely on the same deformity axis, however, resulting in different cutting planes. These characteristics enable a complementary use when defining the optimal type of osteotomy. This understanding enables a more versatile planning approach when considering factors as the surgical approach, biomechanical characteristics of fixation or soft tissue conditions. The newly introduced stepped FDO facilitates an exact reduction of the bone fragments and potentially expands the clinical applicability of the FDO.
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.