Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDogramatzis, Kostas
dc.contributor.authorKitridis, Dimitrios
dc.contributor.authorBekoulis, Theodosios
dc.contributor.authorCraig, Richard
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-06T10:55:47Z
dc.date.available2023-09-06T10:55:47Z
dc.date.issued2022-05-03
dc.identifier.citationShoulder Elbow . 2023 Aug;15(4):424-435en_US
dc.identifier.issn1758-5732
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/17585732221094828
dc.identifier.pmid37538526
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14200/2112
dc.description.abstractEighteen studies were included, nine of which involved SF/SAF (99 patients) and nine TBW (382 patients). SF/SAF techniques were associated with lower rates of fracture/implant displacement (2% versus 9.7%, p = 0.01), implant irritation (1% versus 30.1%, p < 0.001) and overall complications (8% versus 46.1%, p < 0.001) when compared to TBW. Reoperation rates were lower for SF/SAF (3% versus 37.2%, p < 0.001). Total flexion/extension arc achieved was similar (130.16 ± 2.11 versus 129.45 ± 0.93 degrees). On average, patients regained a functional arc of flexion (135.21 ± 4.81 TBW versus 131.32 ± 12.99 SF/SAF) and extension (1.16 ± 7.54 SF/SAF versus 5.76 ± 7.98 TBW).en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherSAGE Publicationsen_US
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2022.
dc.subjectOrthopaedicsen_US
dc.titleNovel suture/suture-anchor fixation versus tension band wiring for olecranon fractures: A systematic review.en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.source.journaltitleShoulder & Elbow
dc.source.volume15
dc.source.issue4
dc.source.beginpage424
dc.source.endpage435
dc.source.countryUnited States
rioxxterms.versionNAen_US
dc.contributor.trustauthorCraig, Richard
dc.contributor.departmentTrauma and Neuro Servicesen_US
dc.contributor.roleMedical and Dentalen_US
oa.grant.openaccessnaen_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record