ArticleSisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni2025
Does Grafting Matter in Surgically Treated Calcaneal Fractures? A Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni, 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
Objectives: The role of bone grafting in the surgical treatment of displaced intra-articular calcaneal fractures (DIACFs) remains controversial. Although bone grafts are commonly used to restore joint congruity and support anatomical reduction, recent evidence favors minimally invasive approaches that may eliminate the need for routine grafting. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of bone graft use on radiological parameters and functional outcomes in Sanders Type II, III, and IV calcaneal fractures treated surgically. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 115 patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for DIACFs between 2016 and 2022. Fractures were classified using the Sanders classification and subgrouped as grafted (+) or non-grafted (-). Böhler and Gissane angles and calcaneal height were measured at four time points. Functional outcomes were assessed using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score. Intergroup and intragroup comparisons were made using appropriate statistical methods. Results: Of the 115 patients, 38 had Type II, 43 had Type III, and 34 had Type IV fractures. Demographics and follow-up durations were comparable across groups (p>0.05). Both grafted and non-grafted groups demonstrated significant postoperative improvements in radiological parameters (p<0.05), which gradually declined over time. No statistically significant intergroup differences were observed at any time point (p>0.05). AOFAS scores and superficial wound infection rates were also similar. Conclusion: Bone grafting did not yield superior radiological or functional outcomes in Sanders Type II, III and IV DIACFs treated with ORIF. These findings support a selective approach to grafting, especially in cases with significant comminution or bone loss, and align with current trends favoring biologically friendly and minimally invasive techniques.
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.