Posted on Nov 5, 2021, 1:38 pm
#1
This article was published in past August in The Bone and Joint Journal.
Altough it's only one article (I haven't made any additional research on the subject), it's peer reviewed and the study was done in a very significant sample (366 individuals).
It is therefore conclusive that Stryde raises serious worries and it is not trustable even after some "adjustments". It may probably have an original , intrinsic flaw.
I was considering Stryde despite the problems occurred and it being recalled. But now I eliminate that option at least until a really new Stryde sucessor is invented and proves it's quality and safety, at least in trials in mammals and, after that, used in the more optimistic voluntary LL pioneers (not wise even if they offer the nail for free initially to some).
I call the attention of Stryde current candidates to reconsider their option in countries where Stryde was NOT recalled, and confront their candidate doctors with this (it's also a "test" to their commitment to "safety first" and being updated), Altough it's not possible to read every journal, this article surely should have raised red flags in the LL doctors community.
At the same time, the current Stryde "users" shouldn't panic because these problems are not usually irreversible, allmost 25% didn't have these problems and among others either the problem doesn't allways cause manifestations or one may just need some special treatment or intervention.
Unfortunately G-nail wasn't tested here.
Part of the article:
"Overall, 77% of STRYDE nails (20/26) had bone abnormalities at the interface compared with only 2% of FITBONE (4/242) and 1% of PRECICE nails (1/98; p < 0.001). Focal osteolysis in conjunction with periosteal reaction at the telescoping interface was only observed in STRYDE nails."
Link:
https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/doi/full/10.1302/0301-620X.103B.BJJ-2021-0549.R1?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=The_Bone_%2526_Joint_Journal_TrendMD_0
Altough it's only one article (I haven't made any additional research on the subject), it's peer reviewed and the study was done in a very significant sample (366 individuals).
It is therefore conclusive that Stryde raises serious worries and it is not trustable even after some "adjustments". It may probably have an original , intrinsic flaw.
I was considering Stryde despite the problems occurred and it being recalled. But now I eliminate that option at least until a really new Stryde sucessor is invented and proves it's quality and safety, at least in trials in mammals and, after that, used in the more optimistic voluntary LL pioneers (not wise even if they offer the nail for free initially to some).
I call the attention of Stryde current candidates to reconsider their option in countries where Stryde was NOT recalled, and confront their candidate doctors with this (it's also a "test" to their commitment to "safety first" and being updated), Altough it's not possible to read every journal, this article surely should have raised red flags in the LL doctors community.
At the same time, the current Stryde "users" shouldn't panic because these problems are not usually irreversible, allmost 25% didn't have these problems and among others either the problem doesn't allways cause manifestations or one may just need some special treatment or intervention.
Unfortunately G-nail wasn't tested here.
Part of the article:
"Overall, 77% of STRYDE nails (20/26) had bone abnormalities at the interface compared with only 2% of FITBONE (4/242) and 1% of PRECICE nails (1/98; p < 0.001). Focal osteolysis in conjunction with periosteal reaction at the telescoping interface was only observed in STRYDE nails."
Link:
https://online.boneandjoint.org.uk/doi/full/10.1302/0301-620X.103B.BJJ-2021-0549.R1?utm_source=TrendMD&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=The_Bone_%2526_Joint_Journal_TrendMD_0