Observational studyEuropean journal of medical research2025
The mechanical test as a supplemental decision support tool for the safe removal of an Ilizarov circular external fixator.
Observational study in European journal of medical research, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTiming the fixator removal is vital for a successful external fixation treatment. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of axial load-share ratio in vivo as a supplemental decision support tool for the safe removal of an Ilizarov circular external fixator.
methodsThis prospective observational study consists of 83 patients undergoing tibial or femoral lengthening with Ilizarov circular external fixation in our institution, from January 2011 to October 2019. In group I (38 patients), the external fixator was removed based on the surgeon's clinical experience and radiographs from January 2011 to June 2015. In group II (45 patients), from July 2015 to October 2019, the supplemental axial load-share (LS) ratio test was accomplished without the knowledge of the clinical results by another medical team. The test was performed by electronically measuring forces in the fixator rods and in a ground force plate. When the LS ratio < 10% was consistent with the conclusion (dense bone formation was achieved in the distraction zone) drawn from the corresponding routine radiographs by the treating surgeon, the external fixator was removed.
resultsThere was no statistical significance in demographic data between the two groups (P > 0.05). In group I, 4 of the 38 patients suffered refracture (the refracture rate was 10.5%) after fixator removal, and bone union was finally achieved with further intervention by intramedullary nail. In group II, 36 patients terminated the external fixation after the first mechanical test, and another 9 patients terminated the external fixation at the subsequent test. None of the 45 patients in group II suffered refracture (the refracture rate was 0%). There was statistical significance in the refracture rate between the two groups (P < 0.05).
conclusionsAdequate assessment of bone regenerate is crucial before removing an external fixator to prevent deformation or refracture. The axial load-share ratio in vivo is a practically quantitative method to supplement radiography and clinical experience for the assessment of regenerate healing, and the axial load-share ratio dropped below 10% is a safe limit for the Ilizarov circular external fixator removal.
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.