Plates for the treatment of long bone metaphyseal and diaphyseal fracture and deformity in osteogenesis imperfecta: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Osteogenesis imperfecta is a rare disorder characterized by bone fragility. The current gold standard treatment for long bone fractures and deformities is telescopic intramedullary rods. Although the use of plates as a standalone implant has been discouraged, recent research has investigated their use as an adjunct to intramedullary fixation. This scoping review aims to assess the current literature on plates for the treatment of long bone metaphyseal and diaphyseal fractures and deformities in osteogenesis imperfecta. Methods: The MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and CDSR databases were searched via PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane. Titles and abstracts of studies were screened, followed by full assessment of selected articles. Studies included were peer-reviewed, published in English in the last 20 years, and investigated plating alone or combined with other implants for the treatment of metaphyseal or diaphyseal long bone fractures and deformities in osteogenesis imperfecta. Results: Eleven articles were included: four investigated plating alone, two compared different implants, and five assessed plating as an adjunct to intramedullary fixation. Conclusions: Using plates alone is not recommended due to the high rate of complications, implant-related complications, and revision surgeries. However, they can be used when deemed appropriate by the surgeon or in narrow canals. Overall, the use of plates as an adjunct to intramedullary nails shows promising results, although further research is required to determine the indications for additional plating and the best timing of plate removal. Level of evidence: Level III (scoping review).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".