Closed tibial shaft fractures: management and treatment complications. A review of the prospective literature.
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To compare the results and complications of the various modalities for treating closed fractures of the tibial shaft described in the prospective literature. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search of the English language literature from 1966 to 1999 was conducted using the MeSH heading "tibial fractures." Studies pertaining to the management of closed tibial shaft fractures were reviewed, and their reference lists were searched for additional articles. STUDY SELECTION: An analysis of the relevant prospective, randomized controlled trials was performed. Studies including confounding data on open fractures or fractures in children were excluded. The 13 remaining studies were reviewed. DATA EXTRACTION: Raw data were extracted and pooled for each method of treatment. DATA SYNTHESIS: The 13 studies described 895 tibial shaft fractures treated by application of a plaster cast, fixation with plate and screws, and reamed or unreamed intramedullary nailing. Although definitions varied, the combined incidence of delayed and nonunion was lower with operative treatment (2.6% with plate fixation, 8.0% with reamed nailing and 16.7% with unreamed nailing) than with closed treatment (17.2%). The incidence of malunion was similarly lower with operative treatment (0% with plate fixation, 3.2% with reamed nailing and 11.8% with unreamed nailing) than with closed treatment (31.7%). Superficial infection was most common with plate fixation (9.0%) compared with 2.9% for reamed nailing, 0.5% for unreamed nailing and 0% for closed treatment. The incidence of osteomyelitis was similar for all groups. Rates of reoperation ranged from 4.7% to 23.1%. CONCLUSIONS: All forms of treatment for tibial shaft fractures are associated with complications. A knowledge of the incidence of each complication facilitates the consent process. To fully resolve the controversy as to the best method of treatment, a large, randomized, controlled trial is required. This review more precisely predicts the expected incidence of complications, allowing the numbers of required patients to be more accurately determined for future randomized controlled studies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle