ReviewJB & JS open access
Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes in Kienbock Disease Following Radial Closing Wedge Osteotomy: An Age Comparative Study and Literature Review.
Review in JB & JS open access. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Age is a preoperative prognostic factor for radial closing wedge osteotomy (RCWO) in Kienbock disease. Specifically, for cases classified as Lichtman stage III, clear criteria for selecting RCWO have not been established. We believe that age can provide vital information for determining the appropriate surgical procedure for Kienbock disease. The aim of this study was to investigate RCWO outcomes for Lichtman stage III by examining different age groups from clinical and radiological perspectives. Methods: Sixteen patients with Lichtman stage III Kienbock disease underwent RCWO. The median age was 59 years, and the median follow-up period was 2.9 years. We determined the age cutoffs for clinical and radiological outcomes using a receiver operating characteristic curve. Subsequently, we conducted intergroup comparisons of postoperative outcomes between the younger and older age groups. Results: Age cutoffs were established at 52.5 and 30 years for clinical and radiological outcomes, respectively. In the comparative analysis, the younger age group (≤52 years; n = 7) demonstrated significantly superior clinical results, including improved range of motion and pain relief, higher postoperative Mayo Wrist Score, and lower Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores. From a radiological perspective, the younger age group (≤30 years; n = 3) experienced segmented lunate bone fragments healing, indicating an improved disease stage compared with the older group. Conclusion: Based on previous literature and our research findings, it is reasonable to conclude that RCWO results in improved clinical outcomes for patients up to their mid-50s and enhanced radiological outcomes for those up to approximately at the age of 30 years. Further studies on these age cutoffs will contribute to refining the surgical selection criteria for RCWO. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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.