European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2021
Management of segmental bone defects of the upper limb: a scoping review with data synthesis to inform decision making.
СтатьяScoping ReviewНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ferreira Nando, Saini Aaron Kumar, Birkholtz Franz Friedrich, Laubscher Maritz
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Injuries to the long bones of the upper limb resulting in bone defects are rare but potentially devastating. Literature on the management of these injuries is limited to case reports and small case series. The aim of this study was to collate the most recent published work on the management of upper limb bone defects to assist with evidence based management when confronted with these cases.
METHODS: Following a preliminary search that confirmed the paucity of literature and lack of comparative trials, a scoping review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. A literature search of major electronic databases was conducted to identify journal articles relating to the management of upper limb long bone defects published between 2010 and 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 46 publications reporting on the management of 341 patients were reviewed. Structural autograft, bone transport, one-bone forearm and the induced membrane technique were employed in an almost equal number of cases. The implemented strategies showed similar outcomes but different indications and complication profiles were observed.
CONCLUSION: Contemporary techniques for the management of post-traumatic upper limb bone defects all produce good results. Specific advantages, disadvantages and complications for each modality should be considered when deciding on which management strategy to employ for each specific patient, anatomical location, and defect size.
METHODS: Following a preliminary search that confirmed the paucity of literature and lack of comparative trials, a scoping review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) was conducted. A literature search of major electronic databases was conducted to identify journal articles relating to the management of upper limb long bone defects published between 2010 and 2020.
RESULTS: A total of 46 publications reporting on the management of 341 patients were reviewed. Structural autograft, bone transport, one-bone forearm and the induced membrane technique were employed in an almost equal number of cases. The implemented strategies showed similar outcomes but different indications and complication profiles were observed.
CONCLUSION: Contemporary techniques for the management of post-traumatic upper limb bone defects all produce good results. Specific advantages, disadvantages and complications for each modality should be considered when deciding on which management strategy to employ for each specific patient, anatomical location, and defect size.