ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2025
Limited evidence to support demineralized bone matrix in foot and ankle surgical procedures: A systematic review.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDemineralized bone matrix (DBM) is a commonly utilized allogenic bone graft substitute to promote osseous union. However, little is known regarding outcomes following DBM utilization in foot and ankle surgical procedures.
aimTo evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes following DBM as a biological adjunct in foot and ankle surgical procedures.
methodsDuring May 2023, the PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases were systematically reviewed to identify clinical studies examining outcomes following DBM for the management of various foot and ankle pathologies. Data regarding study characteristics, patient demographics, subjective clinical outcomes, radiological outcomes, complications, and failure rates were extracted and analyzed. In addition, the level of evidence (LOE) and quality of evidence (QOE) for each individual study was also assessed. Thirteen studies were included in this review.
resultsIn total, 363 patients (397 ankles and feet) received DBM as part of their surgical procedure at a weighted mean follow-up time of 20.8 ± 9.2 months. The most common procedure performed was ankle arthrodesis in 94 patients (25.9%). Other procedures performed included hindfoot fusion, 1st metatarsophalangeal joint arthrodesis, 5th metatarsal intramedullary screw fixation, hallux valgus correction, osteochondral lesion of the talus repair and unicameral talar cyst resection. The osseous union rate in the ankle and hindfoot arthrodesis cohort, base of the 5
conclusionThis current systematic review demonstrated that the utilization of DBM in foot and ankle surgical procedures led to satisfactory osseous union rates with favorable wound complication rates. Excellent outcomes were observed in patients undergoing fracture fixation augmented with DBM, with mixed evidence supporting the routine use of DBM in fusion procedures of the ankle and hindfoot. However, the low LOE together with the low QOE and significant heterogeneity between the included studies reinforces the need for randomized control trials to be conducted to identify the optimal role of DBM in the setting of foot and ankle surgical procedures.
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.