TRAUMA
Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 for treatment of open tibial fractures: a prospective, controlled, randomized study of four hundred and fifty patients
この研究はハイインパクトの可能性があります。
OEのAI駆動型ハイインパクト指標は、論文が掲載されたジャーナルと論文自体の科学的内容の両方からのシグナルを統合することで、論文が持つ可能性の高い影響力を推定します。
最先端の自然言語処理を用いて開発されたOEハイインパクトモデルは、ジャーナルのインパクトファクターのみよりも、研究の将来の引用実績をより正確に予測します。
これにより、臨床的に意義のある研究をより早く認識することが可能になり、読者は将来の診療を形成する可能性が最も高い論文に集中することができます。
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)?
はい = 1
不確実＝0.5
無関係 = 0
いいえ = 0
報告基準評価では、著者が出版物内で試験の方法論的特徴や試験特性を報告する際の透明性を評価します。評価は以下の5つのカテゴリーに分類されます。
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
Fragility Indexは、重要な所見の解釈を助けるツールで、結果の強さの尺度を提供します。Fragility Indexは、その所見が有意でなくなるために、二項対立の結果に追加する必要がある連続した事象の数を表します。数値が小さいほど弱い所見を表し、数値が大きいほど強い所見を表します。
なぜ今この研究が必要なのですか？
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.
主な研究課題は何ですか？
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?
重要な知見は？
- 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).
最も覚えておくべきことは？
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.
それが私の患者ケアにどのように影響するか？
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.
免責事項
このページに記載されている内容は、情報提供のみを目的としたものであり、専門的な医療アドバイス、診断、治療の代わりとなるものではありません。治療が必要な場合は、必ず医師の診断を仰ぐか、最寄りの救急外来を受診してください。このページに記載されている内容に関して個人が表明した意見、信念、見解は、OrthoEvidenceの意見、信念、見解を反映するものではありません。
0の4 月間無料記事のロック解除
