Open Access

Table 3

Review of literature of relevant studies about plate augmentation.

Reference No of patients Avg age (range) Avg follow up (range) Used surgical technique Union rate % Time to union Functional results Encountered complications
Uliana CS et al. (2021) [17] 22 32.3 years 23.5 months Plate augmentation with retained nail 19 (86%) 11.7 months 8 excellent; 14 good No complications
Ebrahimpour A et al. (2021) [18] 19 42.8 12 months Plate augmentation with retained nail 18 (94.7%) 4.75 months VAS31 ± 18.8 No complications
Mittal KK et al. (2021) [19] 21 22–58 years 12 months Plate augmentation with retained nail 21 (100%) 6 months (4–8) Parker mobility score improved from 0 to 4 (2.81) to 8.9 No complications
Chiang et al. (2016) [10] 30 50.5 (24–91) no Plate augmentation with retained nail 29 no no Broken screw not affect union 2 cases
One case infection at iliac crest required debridement
VTE in 2 cases
Jhunjhunwala and Dhawale (2016) [12] 40 35 (18–65) 12 months Plate augmentation with retained nail 39 4 months (3–6 months) Not mentioned One patient deep infection
Vaishya et al. (2016) [20] 16 36 (26–55) 9.62 (7–15 months) Plate augmentation with retained nail 16 6.25 months (4– 9 months) One patient develop surgical site infection need debridement
Birjandinejad A et al. (2009) [21] 25 31.4 (18-53 years) 12 months Plate augmentation with retained nail 25 (100%) 4.78 months (1–6 months) One patient developed wound infection

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.