ArticleCureus2024
Significance of the Sparing Pronator Quadratus for Volar Plating of Distal Radius Fractures: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Pronator quadratus (PQ) acts as the pronator of the wrist and stabiliser of the distal radioulnar joint; it also provides a protective cover over the edge of the plate, preventing friction and subsequent rupture of flexor tendons. The repair of PQ is often difficult, and its durability is questionable; hence, preserving the PQ while volar plating distal radius fractures is advocated. Methods In this prospective randomised trial, 60 patients with a fracture of the distal end of the radius of AO-type (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen) 23 A2, A3, B1, B3, C1, and C2 were treated with volar plate fixation using either the PQ-releasing and repair approach (Group A, n = 30) or the PQ-sparing approach (Group B, n = 30), allowed by simple randomisation. Outcomes recorded included operative time, number of intraoperative radiation shots, range of motion, grip strength, Quick DASH (Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and complications, if any. Results Follow-up was done at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. In the PQ-releasing group, the mean operative time was 54 ± 13 minutes, and the mean number of C-arm shots was 22 ± 7, whereas in the PQ-sparing group, the mean operative time was 82 ± 15 minutes, and the mean number of C-arm shots was 37 ± 7. Palmar flexion, supination, and pronation were significantly better at all the follow-ups until 12 months; however, dorsiflexion was better only until six months in the PQ-sparing group when compared to the PQ-releasing group. DASH score, VAS score, and grip strength were also significantly better until six months in the PQ-sparing group, with no significant difference at the 12-month follow-up in both groups. Conclusions There is statistically significant earlier functional recovery by preserving the PQ muscle for volar plating of distal radius fractures, with no increase in complication rate, and an attempt to preserve the PQ should be made.
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.