ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Traumatic extensor tendon repairs: is the operating room necessary? A comparative study.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeExtensor tendon injuries (ETI) are common. Injuries which involve more than half of the tendon width should be repaired. We aimed to compare the results of ETI repairs performed upon presentation in an emergency department (ED) minor procedure room (MPR) to those performed in the operating room (OR).
methodsA retrospective study comparing a cohort of consecutive patients treated for ETI in an OR between 2018 and 2023 to a cohort of consecutive patients treated for ETI in an ED MPR between 2019 and 2022 was reviewed. The demographics, mechanism and characteristics of injuries and results were compared. Files were reviewed for 90 days for postoperative complications.
resultsOne hundred and thirteen patients (147 tendons) were treated in the OR and 179 patients (203 tendons) were treated in the ED MPR. Patients' demographics and injury mechanism were similar. A higher rate of patients treated in the OR presented with complete tears. The zone of injury differed between groups, but zone V was most frequent in both. No intraoperative complications were encountered. Postoperative complication rates were alike, with 4.4% of patients from the OR cohort and 1.7% patients from the MPR cohort presenting with postoperative infection (p = 0.268). Patients treated in the OR had a longer delay for surgery, a longer length of stay and received more opioid prescriptions.
conclusionsExtensor tendon repairs performed at an ED MPR have comparable outcomes to repairs performed in the OR. The ED MPR setting might reduce medical costs, and it is associated with a shorter length of stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40745415What 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.