ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
A biomechanical comparison of closed-reduction osteosynthesis techniques for fractures of the ulnar styloid.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUlnar styloid fractures (USF) are frequently underestimated and can contribute to clinically relevant wrist instability and impaired functional outcomes. Several osteosynthesis techniques are available for the treatment of unstable USF. This study aims to compare the biomechanical stability of fixation methods applicable to closed reduction - specifically K-wire and headless compression screw fixation - to support clinical decision-making.
methodsThis biomechanical in vitro study was conducted using 30 specimens of artificial ulnae. USF were simulated through a standardized osteotomy at the base. Three groups of ten specimens each were created to compare three methods of osteosynthesis: One 1.4 mm (mm) Kirschner-wire (K-wire) (Group 1KW), two 1.0 K-wires (Group 2KW) or one 2.0 cannulated headless screw (Group CHS). Each construct underwent 1,000 load cycles up to 50 newtons (N) followed by load-to-failure testing, which was defined as displacement ≥ 2 mm. Displacement [mm], stiffness [N/mm] and load to failure [N] were recorded and compared among the groups.
resultsThe mean fracture displacement after 1,000 cycles was 0.58 mm (SD 0.37) in the 1KW group, 0.23 mm (SD 0.09) in the 2KW group and 0.09 mm (SD 0.03) in the CHS group. Significant group differences could be shown between CHS and 1KW (p < 0.01) as well as between CHS and 2KW (p = 0.017). The mean construct stiffness was 269.95 (SD 45.72) N/mm in the 1KW group, 484.08 (SD 207.60) N/mm in the 2KW group and 730.95 (SD 241.42) N/mm in the CHS group. Significant group differences could be shown between CHS and 1KW (p < 0.01). The mean load-to-failure was 136.82 (SD 68.86) N in the 1KW group, 181.60 (SD 28.09) N in the 2KW group and 204.17 (SD 63.10) N in the CHS group. Significant group differences could be shown between CHS and 1KW (p = 0.013).
conclusionUlnar styloid refixation with a headless compression screw provides superior axial stability compared to single or double K-wire fixation. This should be considered in the treatment of unstable USF.
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.