Contemporary management of aseptic diaphyseal tibia non-unions – A systematic review
Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research, ISSN: 1877-0568, Vol: 108, Issue: 5, Page: 102990
2022
- 6Citations
- 15Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations6
- Citation Indexes6
- CrossRef1
- Captures15
- Readers15
- 15
Article Description
Tibia fractures are the most common long bone injuries encountered in the trauma population. The majority are treated successfully but non-union remains a common complication. A systematic review of current evidence regarding the management for aseptic diaphyseal tibial non-unions was undertaken. A systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), was conducted. A total of 632 publications were screened for inclusion. Full text review of 91 studies resulted in 26 publications being retained for final review. The majority of patients included in the studies either underwent exchange nailing ( n = 315) or primary intramedullary nailing ( n = 174) with respective union rates of 88% and 95% being achieved. The highest union rate (97%) was achieved with the use of fine wire external fixation. The major adjuvant treatment modalities were fibula osteotomies ( n = 372; 41%), fixation dynamization ( n = 208; 23%) and bone grafting ( n = 183; 20%). The lack of standardization in reporting of outcomes and the diversity of management strategies employed precludes definitive conclusions or recommendations. Further research is required to ascertain the ideal treatment strategy in the management of aseptic tibial diaphyseal non-unions. IV.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877056821002231; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102990; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85108808360&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34146753; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1877056821002231; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102990
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know