Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40678609›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedic translation2025

Comparative efficacy of non-vascularized and vascularized bone grafts, with emerging insights into bone biomaterial grafts, in scaphoid fracture nonunion treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Reza Karimnazhand, Roshanak Shams, Ali Behmanesh, Masoud Vosough, Azadeh Gharooee Ahangar, Laura Serrano Barrenechea, Omid Mahmoudinasab, Farid Najd Mazhar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedic translation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Reza KarimnazhandBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Roshanak ShamsBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ali BehmaneshBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Masoud VosoughDepartment of Regenerative Medicine, Cell Science Research Center, Royan Institute for Stem Cell Biology and Technology, ACECR, Tehran, Iran.
Azadeh Gharooee AhangarPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Specialist, Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Southern Älvsborg Hospital, Borås, Sweden.
Laura Serrano BarrenecheaPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Specialist, Rehabilitation Medicine Department, Southern Älvsborg Hospital, Borås, Sweden.
Omid MahmoudinasabBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Farid Najd MazharBone and Joint Reconstruction Research Center, Department of Orthopedics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Scaphoid fractures are prevalent wrist injuries with significant treatment challenges, especially when get complicated by nonunion and avascular necrosis. Various grafting techniques, including non-vascularized bone grafts (NVBGs), vascularized bone grafts (VBGs), and bone biomaterial grafts, are utilized to promote healing, but the comparative efficacy of these methods remains unclear. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess the efficacy of different types of bone grafts (NVBGs, VBGs, and bone biomaterials) in the treatment of scaphoid nonunion, focusing on outcomes including union rates, time to healing, and functional recovery scores. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and Web of Science was conducted to identify eligible studies published between 2000 and 2024. studies were categorized into: (1) comparative studies of NVBG vs. VBG, (2) studies reporting only NVBG outcomes, and (3) studies reporting only VBG outcomes. Bone Biomaterials were assessed separately due to limited data (one study). Meta-analyses were performed on in common reported outcomes for each group including union rates, time to healing, range of motion, grip strength, and Modified Mayo Wrist Scores (MMWS). Results: A total of 62 studies involving 2332 scaphoid nonunion patients were included. VBGs demonstrated significantly higher union rates and shorter healing times compared to NVBGs. VBG-treated patients also showed better functional outcomes, including greater grip strength and MMWS in comparative studies NVBGs were less effective in evaluated cases and required longer healing times. The use of bone biomaterial grafts, although limited in the current literature, showed promising results comparable to NVBGs, but further studies are needed. Conclusion: VBGs demonstrated higher union rates and shorter healing times compared to NVBGs, with better functional outcomes in some cases, though evidence certainty is moderate. Bone biomaterials represent a promising alternative to traditional grafts but require more evidence to support their widespread use. Treatment decision-makers should consider clinical context and case-specific conditions. Further research is needed to confirm these trends.Translational potential: This study helps clinical decision-making by evaluating the efficacies of different bone grafts outcomes in complex scaphoid nonunions, potentially reducing treatment failures. It also underscores the emerging role of bone biomaterial grafts as a less invasive alternative, paving the way for personalized orthopedic strategies needing further evaluations to be used for treating scaphoid nonunions.

Indexed as

Bone biomaterialsMeta-analysisNonunionNon-vascularized bone graftOrthopedic surgeryScaphoid fracturesVascularized bone graft

Identifiers

PMID40678609
PMCPMC12269465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.