ArticleOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Extracorporeal shock wave therapy for bone healing disorders : Evaluation from a medical and economic perspective].
Article in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNon-healing fractures, known as pseudoarthroses, continue to pose a significant medical and economic challenge for the healthcare system. This study aims to identify the most efficient, low-complication, and cost-effective options for addressing these challenges.
resultsRecent literature was researched and it was found that extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) achieves similar results to surgical revision in cases of pseudoarthrosis that do not require surgical correction. A comparison of the complication rates between ESWT and surgical revision shows that ESWT is associated with a significantly lower number of complications and, above all, fewer serious complications. If we also compare the costs between these two procedures, we see that the use of ESWT instead of surgical intervention in Austria leads to cost savings of between 65 and 85%, depending on the insurance conditions.
conclusionBased on these findings, focused high-energy ESWT should be used increasingly for the treatment of non-healing bone fractures. Compared to the current "gold standard" for pseudarthrosis treatment, namely surgical revision, ESWT could have the potential to become the "first choice" therapy in suitable cases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42189152What 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.