ReviewCureus2025
Vascularized Versus Non-vascularized Bone Grafting for Scaphoid Non-union: A Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effects of smoking on the management of scaphoid acute fractures and non-unions-a systematic review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Surgical Treatment of Scaphoid Non-Union in Adolescents: A Modified Vascularized Bone Graft Technique.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-union after scaphoid fracture is a common complication. Controversy exists regarding the efficacy of vascularized bone graft (VBG) versus non-vascularized bone graft (NVBG) for scaphoid non-union. In the current meta-analysis, a comprehensive search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library database was done from inception to June 2024. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies that reported outcomes following scaphoid non-union comparing VBG versus NVBG. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias. Any discrepancy was resolved by consensus and discussion with a third reviewer. We included five RCTs and one prospective comparative study. The combined odds ratio is 1.57 (95% CI: 0.87-2.86), favoring a higher union rate in the experimental group. The overall pooled mean difference of -1.40 (95% CI: -2.03 to -0.77) indicated that the VBG has a significantly shorter time to union compared to the NVBG. In conclusion, our results showed that VBG may be associated with an improved union rate and a decrease in union time, though no significant functional benefits.
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.