ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Locking compression plate as a sequential external fixator following the distraction phase for the treatment of tibial bone defects caused by fracture-related infection: experiences from 22 cases.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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.
- Article
- Externally Applied Metaphyseal Locking Plate: An Alternative to Unilateral External Fixator in Definitive Management of Compound Tibia Fractures - A Prospective Study.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2025Article
- Bone transport combined with internal fixation in post-traumatic distal humerus defects and nonunions: retrospective analysis of 16 patients.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to report the clinical and psychological outcomes of using a locking compression plate (LCP) as a sequential external fixator following the distraction phase in the treatment of tibial bone defects caused by fracture-related infection (FRI).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the clinical records and consecutive X-ray images of patients with tibial bone defects who were treated with an LCP as a sequential external fixator following the distraction phase, between June 2017 and December 2022. The ASAMI criteria were applied to assess the bone and functional outcomes, and postoperative complications were evaluated by using the Paley classification. The SCL-90-R questionnaire was used to evaluate patients' psychological symptoms, documented and compared at Time 1 (before bone transport), Time 2 (after distraction phase), and Time 3(final follow-up). Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
resultsThis study included 22 participants with a mean age of 37.72 ± 9.65 years, comprising 17 males (77.2%) and 5 females (22.7%). The mean postoperative follow-up time was 29 ± 2.65 months. The mean number of previous surgical interventions per patient was 5.22 ± 1.26. Twenty-two patients with tibial bone defects caused by FRI were successfully treated using an LCP as a sequential external fixator following the distraction phase, with a mean bone union time of 9.95 ± 1.52 months. Bone union was achieved in all cases (100%) without the use of bone grafts at the docking sites. Following the completion of distraction, the Ilizarov apparatus or monorail fixator was retained for an additional 2.20 ± 0.53 weeks before being exchanged for the external locking compression plate (ELCP). The mean external fixation time (EFT) was 12.29 ± 1.67 months, with a mean external fixation index (EFI) of 1.83 ± 0.22 month/cm (Table 2). At the final follow-up, bone and functional outcomes were evaluated using the ASAMI criteria. Bone outcomes included 10 excellent and 12 good results, while functional outcomes included 12 excellent, 9 good, and 1 fair result. Statistically significant differences in psychological impacts were observed among the three time points (Time 1 vs. Time 2, P = 0.034; Time 2 vs. Time 3, P = 0.020; Time 1 vs. Time 3, P = 0.012). Complications were observed in 6 patients (27.2%), including joint stiffness (n = 3), pin-track infection (n = 3), and refracture (n = 1). All complications were successfully managed.
conclusionLCP used as a sequential external fixator following the distraction phase is an effective method for treating massive tibial bone defects caused by FRI and is also suitable for patients with scars and poor tissue conditions resulting from multiple previous debridement. Furthermore, this combined technique could be more beneficial in alleviating psychological burdens, supporting patients' engagement in rehabilitation, and facilitating a return to normal life. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.