ReviewKnee surgery & related research2025
Arthroscopic screw versus suture fixation in tibial eminence fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Knee surgery & related research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- A Novel Physeal-Sparing Fixation Technique for Tibial Eminence Fractures in Paediatric Patients.Cureus · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTibial eminence fractures are common injuries that can cause significant functional limitations and require timely and effective treatment. Arthroscopic screw fixation and suture fixation are the primary methods used for managing displaced fractures. This study aimed to compare the functional and clinical outcomes between the two groups.
methodsAn associated systematic review was carried out with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines utilizing the PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Sage Journals, Science Direct, and Core Journals databases. Any language publication that assessed the results following the fixation of tibial eminence fractures by screw and suture fixation from 2000 to 2024 was included. Clinical, functional outcomes, subsequent surgeries, complications, operation time, and union time were evaluated. All data were assessed using SPSS version 25 and RevMan version 5.4.
resultsA total of 9 studies involving 412 patients were analyzed out of 3365 papers. There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between the two methods in the Lysholm score, Tegner Activity Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, range of motion, Lachman test, pivot-shift test, KT-1000, and union time. However, screw fixation had a significantly higher rate of subsequent surgeries (planned removal implant excluded) (29.75% versus 11.6%; p < 0.00001), complications (p = 0.0003), and shorter operation times (67 min versus 85 min; p = 0.0003).
conclusionsThe findings revealed that suture fixation carried a significantly lower risk of subsequent surgery and complications but required a longer operation time. Each technique presents advantages and challenges, making the decision a crucial aspect of patient care.
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.