ArticleJournal of hand surgery global online2026
Open Versus Arthroscopic Reduction for Perilunate and Lunate Dislocations: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.
Article in Journal of hand surgery global online, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Perilunate and lunate dislocations represent complex wrist injuries requiring urgent reduction and stabilization. While open reduction has been the gold standard, arthroscopic techniques have emerged as less invasive alternatives. However, comparative evidence remains limited, and the management strategies are controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 guidelines. Dedicated searches of major databases were performed up to June 16, 2025. Studies comparing open and arthroscopic reduction techniques for perilunate/lunate dislocations were included. Primary outcomes included functional scores (Mayo Wrist Score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), whereas secondary outcomes encompassed complications, anatomical success, and grip strength recovery. Network meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models, with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework for evidence quality assessment. Results: Thirty-four studies with total of 962 patients were included (open reduction: 584 patients, arthroscopic: 378 patients). Direct comparative evidence was limited to three studies (48 patients). Arthroscopic reduction demonstrated superior functional outcomes. Complication rates showed advantages for arthroscopic approaches. Subgroup analyses revealed surgeon experience significantly affected outcomes, with experienced surgeons achieving superior results and fewer complications. Greater arc fractures demonstrated higher complication rates regardless of approach. Conclusions: Arthroscopic reduction may offer functional advantages over open techniques for perilunate dislocations, especially when performed by experienced surgeons for acute, less complex injuries. However, evidence quality remains low, warranting high-quality randomized trials. Type of study/level of evidence: Therapeutic 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.