rhBMP-2 is safe and improves outcomes in open tibial fractures .
Este estudio ha sido identificado como potencialmente de alto impacto.
La métrica de alto impacto de OE, impulsada por la IA, estima la influencia que probablemente tendrá un artículo integrando señales tanto de la revista en la que se publica como del contenido científico del propio artículo.
Desarrollado mediante el procesamiento del lenguaje natural más avanzado, el modelo de Alto Impacto de OE predice con mayor precisión el futuro rendimiento de las citas de un estudio que el factor de impacto de la revista por sí solo.
Esto permite reconocer antes las investigaciones clínicamente significativas y ayuda a los lectores a centrarse en los artículos con más probabilidades de configurar la práctica futura.
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2014;2(9):25 J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Dec;84-A(12):2123-34450 patients with an open tibial fracture were randomized to receive the standard of care with either intramedullary nail fixation and routine soft-tissue management (the control group), an implant containing 0.75 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 alongside the standard care, or an implant containing 1.50 mg/mL of rhBMP-2 alongside the standard care. The rhBMP-2 implant was placed over the fracture at the time of wound closure. At 12 months, the 1.50-mg/mL rhBMP-2 group had a 44% reduction in the risk of failure, significantly fewer invasive interventions and hardware failures, faster wound-healing and significantly faster fracture healing than the control patients. .
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Sí = 1
Incierto = 0,5
No relevante = 0
No = 0
La evaluación de los criterios de información evalúa la transparencia con la que los autores informan de las características metodológicas y del ensayo dentro de la publicación. La evaluación se divide en cinco categorías que se presentan a continuación.
4/4
Randomization
4/4
Outcome Measurements
2/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
El Índice de Fragilidad es una herramienta que ayuda en la interpretación de hallazgos significativos, proporcionando una medida de fuerza para un resultado. El Índice de Fragilidad representa el número de eventos consecutivos que es necesario añadir a un resultado dicotómico para que el hallazgo deje de ser significativo. Un número pequeño representa un hallazgo más débil y un número grande un hallazgo más fuerte.
¿Por qué se necesitaba ahora este estudio?
Open tibial fractures are associated with a high rate of complications, including delayed bone union and nonunion. Secondary interventions to promote union of open tibial fractures are associated with high rates of patient morbidity and reduced quality of life. Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) has shown promise in animal and human studies as an osteoinductive agent and it is thought to have a positive role in improving union and reducing secondary interventions. This study was needed to assess the safety and efficacy of rhBMP-2 in the treatment of open tibial fractures.
¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?
In patients with an open tibial fracture, what is the safety and efficacy of an rhBMP-2 implant based on dose and compared to standard of care alone over 12 months?
- The percentages of patients requiring secondary interventions for fracture healing were 26% and 37% in the higher and lower dose groups respectively, compared with 46% in the control group (p = 0.0004).
- The number and the invasiveness of these interventions were significantly lower in the higher dose group than in the control group (p=0.0326 for number and p=0.0264 for invasiveness).
- Among the higher dose group, there was a significant 44% reduction in the risk of secondary intervention compared with the control group (p=0.0005; relative risk=0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.40-0.78).
- At 6 months, the healing rate observed in the higher dose group was 21% higher than that in the control group (p=0.0008). Kaplan-Meyer survival analysis indicated that the time to fracture healing was shorter in the higher dose group than in the control group (p=0.0022). This significance was not seen in the lower dose group.
- 32 patients (22%) in the control group had hardware failure compared with 16 patients (11%) in the higher dose group (p=0.0174).
- 83% of the patients in the higher dose group had soft-tissue healing 6 weeks after wound closure compared with 65% of the patients in the control group (p=0.0010).
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?
rhBMP-2 shows a significant and dose-dependent effect on improving the rate of fracture and wound healing, and reducing the risks of secondary intervention and hardware failure in open tibial fractures over 12 months.
¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?
Patients may benefit from an implant of rhBMP-2 along with standard care for open tibial fractures to reduce the risk of complications over 12 months and improve the rate of healing. Additional studies may be needed with longer-term follow-up and assessment of functional criteria.
DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD
El contenido de esta página tiene únicamente fines informativos y no pretende sustituir el consejo, diagnóstico o tratamiento médico profesional. Si necesita tratamiento médico, busque siempre el consejo de su médico o acuda al servicio de urgencias más cercano. Las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista expresados por las personas sobre el contenido que se encuentra en esta página no reflejan las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista de OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 artículos mensuales GRATIS desbloqueados
