ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2025
Outcomes of autologous bone grafts
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Injectable hydrogels for bone regeneration: from materials design to clinical translation.RSC advances · 2026Review
- Efficacy of 3D-printed bone graft container in the treatment of tibial plateau fractures and postoperative rehabilitation prediction model.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Does autologous bone grafting provide better outcomes than tricalcium phosphate synthetic grafting in tibial plateau fractures with articular depression?Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES · 2026Article
- Critical appraisal of bone graft meta-analysis in tibial plateau fractures.World journal of orthopedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTibial plateau fractures often require structural support for metaphyseal defects created during articular reduction. While autologous bone grafting has been utilized as the gold standard, bone substitutes offer advantages including reduced donor site morbidity. Our meta-analysis evaluated the comparative efficacy of these approaches across clinical and operative outcomes.
aimTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures. Primary outcomes included joint depression, secondary collapse rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate. Subgroup analyses were performed by fracture complexity, geographic region, and methodological factors. In addition to that, we also developed a combined outcome score integrating structural, procedural, and complication domains.
resultsSeven randomized controlled trials with 424 patients (296 bone substitute, 128 autograft) were included. No significant differences in joint depression or secondary collapse were observed across fracture complexity categories. Geographic variations were evident, with Western studies showing significantly higher risk of secondary collapse with autografts (risk ratio = 1.45,
conclusionBone substitutes provide similar structural outcomes to autologous bone grafts while having better procedural advantages in tibial plateau fracture management. These findings support bone substitutes as a viable option across fracture patterns. Future studies should focus on specific bone substitute formulations and cost-effectiveness analyses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.