ReviewActa ortopedica brasileira2025
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF TREATMENTS FOR FOREARM FRACTURES IN CHILDREN: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.
Review in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 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
To compare the clinical outcomes of children with forearm bone fractures undergoing surgical treatment with intramedullary fixation with TEN rods and Kirschner wires. A systematic review of the literature was carried out, conducting a search for data in the Pubmed/Medline, Science Direct and Scielo databases. The quality of the trials was assessed by the MINORS tool and the meta-analysis of the studies was performed using the R software (version 4.4.0). 16 studies were selected, representing 1,075 patients, with a predominance of males, where the mean age range varied from 8.32 to 14.2 years. Applying the MINORS Scale, the quality of the studies was good (≥ 11). The meta-analysis of the studies revealed a statistically significant increase in the risk of adverse events in the experimental group compared to the control group, with a risk ratio (RR) of 1.35 (95% CI: 1.03 to 1.76). The combined mean difference (raw mean) between the experimental group and the control group was -12.42 minutes (95% CI: -13.75 to -11.10) in the fixed-effect model, indicating a significant reduction in surgical time for the experimental group. In the random-effect model, the mean difference was -21.62 minutes (95% CI: -33.30 to -9.94). Regarding fracture consolidation time, the fixed-effect model indicated a raw mean difference of 0.99 (95% CI: 0.61 to 1.36). Furthermore, heterogeneity was moderate to high, with an I² of 73% (p < 0.01). Intramedullary fixation with TEN nails and Kirschner wires presents a diversity of clinical outcomes and complications. The systematic review highlighted the importance of choosing the appropriate treatment method, considering the patient characteristics and the nature of the fracture.
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.