ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Arthroscopic Versus Open Bone Grafting and Internal Fixation of Scaphoid Nonunion-A Systematic Review.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Arthroscopic scaphoid reconstruction in non-unions : Aspects for indication, technique, and results].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Arthroscopic bone grafting in scaphoid fracture nonunion: Is it a universal solution?Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2025Review
- Arthroscopic Versus Open Bone Grafting and Internal Fixation of Scaphoid Nonunion-A Systematic Review.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Scaphoid nonunion often requires surgical management involving the combination of a bone graft and internal fixation to restore the carpal alignment and length. While traditionally, the scaphoid waist nonunions have been treated with open bone grafts, with the advent of arthroscopy, bone graft reconstruction can now be carried out as an arthroscopic assisted minimally invasive procedure. We aimed to compare outcomes between open and arthroscopic bone grafting in the treatment of scaphoid nonunion. Methods: A review protocol was established according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched for articles on open and arthroscopic bone grafting for scaphoid nonunion with a minimum 12 month follow-up. The primary outcome was union rates in the two techniques. Secondary outcomes were changes in pain scores, complications, functional outcomes using different scoring systems, grip strength, range of motion at the wrist, and radiological parameters for restoring normal carpal alignment. Results: Forty studies reporting on 1534 wrists were included (1152 open, 382 arthroscopic). The union rate was 93.4% and 93.2% with open and arthroscopic techniques, respectively. The functional scores were comparable between the two techniques. All patients had a reduction in their pain scores. The radiological outcome parameters were not reported by any of the studies in the arthroscopic group. Conclusion: While bone grafting with both open and arthroscopic techniques for scaphoid nonunion showed comparable union rates and functional scores, further research is needed to assess the radiological outcomes of the arthroscopic technique.
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.