ArticleSurgical neurology international2024
A new device to treat ping-pong skull fractures: The hammer puller technique. A comparative analysis using a realistic simulation model.
Article in Surgical neurology international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aims to describe a new surgical technique for the treatment of ping-pong skull fractures and to evaluate its efficacy in a realistic simulation model compared to the dissector elevation technique. Methods: A total of 64 fractures were obtained using 16 model units, each with four fractures (two frontal and two parietal). The hammer puller technique was applied for left-sided fractures and the dissector technique for right-sided fractures. The variables evaluated were fracture repair time, fracture volume, fracture corrected volume, and fracture correction percentage. Fractures were separated into groups according to the surgical technique used (hammer or dissector) and the bone fractured (frontal or parietal). Statistical analysis was performed with Jamovi® software (version 2.3) using Student's Results: A complete degree of fracture correction was achieved with both techniques, demonstrating a sufficient performance in the correction of the deformity. The hammer technique was shown to be faster in correcting frontal bone depressions with 20.1 ± 7.8 s compared to 31.3 ± 4.7 s for the dissector technique, Conclusion: This study describes a new minimally invasive surgical technique for the treatment of ping-pong fractures. Comparative analysis showed that both techniques were equally effective but that the hammer puller technique was more efficient than the dissector elevation technique, especially for frontal bone fractures.
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.