Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39392938›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews2024

Comparing Multipin Clamps With Outriggers With Standard Clamps for Lower Extremity Periarticular External Fixation: Similar Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes.

Shannon Tse, Aziz Saade, Ijezie Ikwuezunma, Cody L Walters, Samuel K Simister, Augustine M Saiz, Ellen Fitzpatrick, Gillian Soles, Mark A Lee, Sean T Campbell

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Shannon TseFrom the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California Davis (Dr. Tse, Dr. Saade, Dr. Ikwuezunma, Dr. Simister, Dr. Saiz, Dr. Fitzpatrick, Dr. Soles, Dr. Lee, and Dr. Campbell); and the University of California Davis School of Medicine, Sacramento, CA (Mr. Walters).ORCID 0000-0003-0370-2377
Aziz Saade
Ijezie Ikwuezunma
Cody L Walters
Samuel K Simister
Augustine M Saiz
Ellen Fitzpatrick
Gillian Soles
Mark A Lee

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionStaged treatment of high-energy periarticular tibia fractures involves temporization with closed reduction and external fixation, aiming to provide early reduction and stabilization while mitigating soft-tissue complications. Various external fixator configurations exist, including those that use a "multipin" clamp capable of holding multiple pins but limiting pin placement to a single plane. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes and associated costs of standard and multipin outrigger clamp constructs in tibial plateau and pilon fractures treated with temporary external fixation. We hypothesized that use of the multipin clamp may be associated with poorly aligned reductions and increased complication rates.

methodsA retrospective review of 100 patients with periarticular tibial plateau (AO/OTA: 41B/C) or pilon (43B/C) fracture at a Level 1 trauma center from 2014 to 2023 was conducted. Patient, injury, and complication characteristics were collected. Patients were categorized based on the external fixator clamp used: multipin (MP) or standard (S). Clinical outcomes and complication rates were assessed. Radiographic alignment was evaluated by the change in anterior and lateral distal tibial angles, and sagittal plane translation for pilon fractures, and medial and posterior proximal tibial angles for plateau fractures.

results70 patients underwent standard (25 pilon, 45 plateau) and 30 multipin (10 pilon, 20 plateau) external fixation. MP and S groups showed no notable differences in demographics or injury characteristics. Both groups demonstrated comparable complication rates and radiological alignment outcomes, with no notable differences observed. MP constructs were more costly than standard systems.

conclusionIn this retrospective study of 100 patients, there was no difference in radiographic or clinical outcomes between the standard frame and multipin frame groups. Typical costs for the multipin frame constructs were $635 to $1249 more than the standard frame constructs.

Indexed as

External FixatorsFracture FixationTibial FracturesAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRadiographyRetrospective StudiesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID39392938
PMCPMC11473059

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.