ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Clinical efficacy of STMIPO in the management of distal one-third fibular fractures.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Second to minimally invasive plates osteosynthesis (STMIPO) is a novel surgical technique that combines the small incision, minimally invasive, and aesthetic advantages of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with the direct visualization fracture reduction of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). This study primarily evaluates the clinical efficacy of STMIPO in the treatment of distal one-third fibular fractures. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 145 fibular fracture patients treated in our orthopedic department from January 2021 to December 2023. All surgeries were performed by two main surgeons; one used open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF group), and the other used STMIPO technique (STMIPO group). The study compared the ORIF and STMIPO groups in terms of operation time, fracture healing time, intraoperative blood loss, length of incision, postoperative ankle AOFAS score for isolated fibular fractures, and postoperative complications (such as wound infection, plate exposure, delayed bone healing, and hardware-related pain). Results: The average follow-up time was 17.12 ± 2.66 months (weighted average of the two groups), during which all patients achieved osseous union of the fibula. Statistical analysis showed that the STMIPO group had advantages over the ORIF group in terms of surgical incision length, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications. There was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative ankle AOFAS scores for isolated fibular fractures. Conclusion: STMIPO technique, as a new minimally invasive fracture treatment technique, has demonstrated significant advantages in the treatment of distal one-third fibular fractures, including smaller surgical incisions, minimal damage to surrounding tissues, faster postoperative recovery, and comparable fracture healing. Level of evidence: Therapeutic Level III.
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.