ArticleScientific reports2024
The efficacy of physeal bar resection with guided growth in the treatment of physeal arrest with angular limb deformity.
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 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.
- Effects of Multiple Metaphyseal Hole Creation on Long Bone Growth in a Rabbit Model.Yonsei medical journal · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Premature physeal arrest can cause progressive deformities and functional disabilities of the lower limbs. This study addressed the outcomes after physeal bar resection with or without guided growth (temporary hemiepiphysiodesis) for the treatment of angular limb deformities. We retrospectively analyzed 27 patients (mean 9 years; range, 3-12 years) who underwent physeal bar resection of the distal femur (15 patients), proximal tibia (3 patients), and distal tibia (9 patients) between 2002 and 2020. Fifteen patients underwent physeal bar resection only (Group A), and the other twelve underwent simultaneous guided growth (Group B). The correction angle (angle change between the preoperative and last follow-up values) was compared and analyzed. The overall mean correction angle was 2.9° (range, - 9 to 18.3°). A total of 12 (45%) patients had a > 5° angular deformity improvement (mean, 9.6°; range, 5-18.3°), 9 (33%) had a < 5° angular change; and 6 (22%) had a > 5° worsening of the angular deformity (mean, 6.7°; range, 5.2-9°). The correction angle in Group B (mean 7.6° ± 6.2) was significantly higher than that in Group A (mean - 0.77° ± 6.3) (P = 0.01). We found six (40%) and zero patients with a > 5° angular deformity increase in Groups A and B, respectively (P < 0.047). The group that underwent physeal bar resection with guided growth showed significantly higher correction angles than the group that underwent physeal bar resection alone. Additionally, none of the patients in the guided growth group experienced an increased angular deformity. Therefore, combining guided growth with physeal bar resection may lead to better outcomes in the treatment of growth arrest with angular deformities.
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.