ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2024
Heterotopic ossification (HO) prophylaxis after distal biceps repair.
Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypothesis and Background: A potential complication of distal biceps repair is heterotopic ossification (HO), which impacts both limb function and overall patient outcomes. Common HO prophylaxis methods include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or localized radiation therapy. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine an effective means of providing HO prophylaxis following distal biceps repair. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following databases were searched for studies published after 1998: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Studies were included if they compared patients who were placed on HO prophylaxis following distal biceps repair compared to those that were not placed on HO prophylaxis, were prospective randomized controlled trials or retrospective case-control studies, and evaluated HO prophylaxis regimens. Studies that were not written in English, analyzed animals or cadavers, and did not directly evaluate patients undergoing distal biceps repair, did not study HO rophylaxis, or had alternative study designs were excluded. Results: The initial search identified 134 studies, 4 of which met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Each of these 4 (100%) studies evaluated indomethacin, and 1 (25%) study evaluated both indomethacin and meloxicam. The included studies evaluated HO prophylaxis in the setting of both one- and two-incision distal biceps repairs. Overall, 2 of the 4 (50%) studies supported the use of indomethacin as HO prophylaxis, 1 of 4 (25%) did not support the use of indomethacin for HO prophylaxis, and 1 of 4 (25%) studies reported that indomethacin and meloxicam are similarly effective HO prophylaxis drugs. None of the studies meeting the inclusion criteria analyzed radiation therapy as a potential method for HO prophylaxis. Discussion and Conclusion: Indomethacin is commonly used as a prophylactic measure for HO following distal biceps repair; however, based on the results of this study, it is not necessary to use this routinely due to its limited efficacy in preventing HO and potential risks (eg, gastrointestinal upset, bleeding) associated with the medication. Future randomized studies should evaluate the use of other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (eg, meloxicam) for HO prophylaxis in addition to not using any HO prophylaxis following either one- or two-incision distal biceps repairs.
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.