ReviewMusculoskeletal surgery2026
Deltoid ligament repair is not necessary in patients with bimalleolar equivalent ankle fractures.
Review in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous meta-analyses have shown that systematic deltoid repair (DR) in patients with bimalleolar equivalent ankle fractures improves post-operative functional outcomes and reduces reoperations. However, these studies were retrospective and are subject to the biases inherent in the nature of observational studies. Therefore, by including only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), this meta-analysis will assess the benefits of DR in these patients. Following the PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were accessed and explored until November 2025. The extracted data consisted of the risk of complications, post-operative and improvement in medial clear space (MCS), operative time, post-operative pain and post-operative American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. Five RCTs were included, consisting of 244 patients, with 121 in the DR group and 123 in the control group. There was no difference between the two groups in adverse events. In addition, there were no differences in post-operative MCS, pain, or AOFAS between the two groups. However, the control group had a shorter operative time (Mean Difference = 46.75 min, p = 0.05). The results of this meta-analysis revealed that systematic DR did not have additional benefits in patients with bimalleolar equivalent ankle fractures. Future studies are needed in order to figure out the characteristics of patients that benefit from DR in this type of ankle fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42490024What 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.