ArticleJPRAS open2025
The accuracy of preoperative ultrasound use in primary flexor tendon repair: A systematic review.
Article in JPRAS open, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Flexor tendon injuries disrupt hand function and require precise surgical repair. Traditionally assessed through physical examination alone, ultrasound scanning (USS) is emerging as a valuable tool, offering real-time, non-invasive imaging to assess injury type and extent. This review evaluates the USS's accuracy in preoperative flexor tendon assessment. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Studies on primary flexor tendon injuries assessed with preoperative USS were included, while non-clinical studies, animal models, and incomplete datasets were excluded. Two reviewers screened articles, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Results: From 1354 initial studies, nine met inclusion criteria, comprising one RCT, four prospective, and four retrospective studies. In total, 450 patients (593 tendons) with diverse injuries were assessed. USS sensitivity and specificity were high for complete tears (88.78 % and 92.23 %) but lower for partial tears (0.67 % and 66 %). Discussion: USS provides an effective, non-invasive method for identifying complete flexor tendon injuries, reducing the need for exploratory surgery, facilitating targeted incisions, and potentially shortening operative times. By enabling accurate surgical planning, USS helps minimize dissection and trauma, aligning with sustainable healthcare practices. Its application in delayed presentations also guides repair strategies, enhancing outcomes through more precise tendon localization. Level of evidence: IIIA.
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.