-
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Jan 2020The standard diagnostic work-up for hand and wrist fractures consists of history taking, physical examination and imaging if needed, but the supporting evidence for this...
BACKGROUND
The standard diagnostic work-up for hand and wrist fractures consists of history taking, physical examination and imaging if needed, but the supporting evidence for this work-up is limited. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the diagnostic accuracy of tests for hand and wrist fractures.
METHODS
A systematic search for relevant studies was performed. Methodological quality was assessed and sensitivity (Se), specificity (Sp), accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were extracted from the eligible studies.
RESULTS
Of the 35 eligible studies, two described the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures. Physical examination with or without radiological examination for diagnosing scaphoid fractures (five studies) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 15 to 100%, 13-98%, 55-73%, 14-73% and 75-100%, respectively. Physical examination with radiological examination for diagnosing other carpal bone fractures (one study) showed a Se of 100%, with the exception of the triquetrum (75%). Physical examination for diagnosing phalangeal and metacarpal fractures (one study) showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 26 to 55%, 13-89%, 45-76%, 41-77% and 63-75%, respectively. Imaging modalities of scaphoid fractures showed predominantly low values for PPV and the highest values for Sp and NPV (24 studies). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT), Ultrasonography (US) and Bone Scintigraphy (BS) were comparable in diagnostic accuracy for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture, with an accuracy ranging from 85 to 100%, 79-100%, 49-100% and 86-97%, respectively. Imaging for metacarpal and finger fractures showed Se, Sp, accuracy, PPV and NPV ranging from 73 to 100%, 78-100%, 70-100%, 79-100% and 70-100%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Only two studies were found on the diagnostic accuracy of history taking for hand and wrist fractures in the current review. Physical examination was of moderate use for diagnosing a scaphoid fracture and of limited use for diagnosing phalangeal, metacarpal and remaining carpal fractures. MRI, CT and BS were found to be moderately accurate for the definitive diagnosis of clinically suspected carpal fractures.
Topics: Carpal Bones; Finger Phalanges; Fractures, Bone; Hand Injuries; Humans; Medical History Taking; Metacarpal Bones; Physical Examination; Predictive Value of Tests; Reproducibility of Results; Wrist Injuries
PubMed: 31910838
DOI: 10.1186/s12891-019-2988-z -
Medicine Nov 2019Hand fractures are the second most common upper-extremity fractures. The standard X-ray has shortcomings, such as exposure to radiation. Ultrasound has been reported as... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUNDS
Hand fractures are the second most common upper-extremity fractures. The standard X-ray has shortcomings, such as exposure to radiation. Ultrasound has been reported as an alternative method of detecting hand fractures. In this study, we used meta-analysis to assess the diagnostic value of ultrasound for hand fractures.
METHODS
Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relative citations up to June 2019. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve were estimated.
RESULTS
Seven studies including 842 participants (845 examined hands) met our inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, and NLR of ultrasound for detecting hand fractures were 91%, 96%, 20.66, and 0.09, respectively. The pooled DOR was 231.17, indicating a very powerful diagnostic ability of ultrasound. Meta-regression showed that there was no heterogeneity with respect to age, cut-off, the performer of the ultrasound, and the types of hand fractures.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that ultrasound had an excellent diagnostic value for hand fractures. In clinic, we proposed using ultrasound as a first-line and radiation-free modality in detecting hand fractures, including phalanx and metacarpal fractures.
Topics: Finger Phalanges; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Ultrasonography
PubMed: 31689869
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017823 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Jan 2019Despite the proven efficacy and advantages of absorbable implants, their use for metacarpal shaft fixation has been limited. This is likely due to the high reported...
BACKGROUND
Despite the proven efficacy and advantages of absorbable implants, their use for metacarpal shaft fixation has been limited. This is likely due to the high reported complication rates in early studies with polyglycolic acid (PGA) implants, notably high rates of noninfectious inflammatory reaction (5%-25%), occurring up to 30 weeks after fixation. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical outcomes of newer absorbable plates and screws in the treatment of metacarpal shaft fractures.
METHODS
The authors performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases dating from 1946 to 2017. Primary outcome measures were the development of noninfectious inflammatory reaction and implant failure.
RESULTS
A total of 42 metacarpal shaft fractures in 35 patients were included. The average follow-up time was 20.4 months (n = 24; range: 3.6-61 months). Only 1 case (2.4%) of noninfectious inflammatory reaction was reported with polylactic acid (PLA) plates and PLA/PGA compounds. Noninfectious inflammatory reaction was observed in 4 out of the 9 patients (44.4%) with a trimethylene carbonate/PLA compound. Symptoms appeared after an average time of 15.8 months (range: 12-19 months) post-fixation. Painless prolonged inflammation that resolved spontaneously within 6 months was reported in 7.1% of cases (n = 3). Implant failure with loss of fracture reduction was reported in 9.5% of cases (n = 4).
CONCLUSIONS
Newer absorbable materials appear to have significantly lower rates of noninfectious inflammatory reaction than previously reported. When compared with metallic fixation of the metacarpal shaft, absorbable fixation appears to have comparable complication rates and biomechanical properties.
Topics: Absorbable Implants; Device Removal; Dioxanes; Disability Evaluation; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Fractures, Bone; Hand Strength; Humans; Inflammation; Metacarpal Bones; Polyesters; Polyglycolic Acid; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 30239220
DOI: 10.1177/1558944718798856 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2017Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral analgesics, is no longer adequate in reducing disability and pain. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (thumb) osteoarthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following sources up to 08 August 2013: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), CINAHL (1982 to August 2013), Clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) and World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Portal (to August 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs where the intervention was surgery for people with thumb osteoarthritis. Outcomes were pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors independently screened and included studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 studies with 670 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty (IA), Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and Swanson joint replacement). We did not find any studies that compared surgery with sham surgery or surgery with non-surgical interventions.Most included studies had an unclear risk of most biases which raises doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure (re-operation) or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. One study demonstrated a difference in adverse events (mild-moderate swelling) between Artelon joint replacement and trapeziectomy with tendon interposition. However, the quality of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and imprecision of results.Low quality evidence suggests trapeziectomy with LRTI may not provide additional benefits or result in more adverse events over trapeziectomy alone. Mean pain (three studies, 162 participants) was 26 mm on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 is no pain) for trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI reduced pain by a mean of 2.8 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.2) or an absolute reduction of 3% (-10% to 4%). Mean physical function (three studies, 211 participants) was 31.1 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (0 is best physical function, or no disability) with trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in sightly lower function scores (standardised mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.32), an equivalent to a worsening of 0.2 points (95% CI -5.8 to 6.1) on a 0 to 100 point scale (absolute decrease in function 0.03% (-0.83% to 0.88%)). Low quality evidence from four studies (328 participants) indicates that the mean number of adverse events was 10 per 100 participants for trapeziectomy alone, and 19 events per 100 participants for trapeziectomy with LRTI (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.73) or an absolute risk increase of 9% (95% CI 0% to 28%). Low quality evidence from one study (42 participants) indicates that the mean scapho-metacarpal distance was 2.3 mm for the trapeziectomy alone group, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in a mean of 0.1 mm less distance (95% CI -0.81 to 0.61). None of the included trials reported global assessment, quality of life, and revision or re-operation rates.Low-quality evidence from two small studies (51 participants) indicated that trapeziectomy with LRTI may not improve function or slow joint degeneration, or produce additional adverse events over trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction.We are uncertain of the benefits or harms of other surgical techniques due to the mostly low quality evidence from single studies and the low reporting rates of key outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with LRTI had additional benefit over arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with IA. There was also insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with IA had any additional benefit over the Artelon joint implant, the Swanson joint replacement or trapeziectomy alone.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any studies that compared surgery to sham surgery or to non-operative treatments. We were unable to demonstrate that any technique confers a benefit over another technique in terms of pain and physical function. Furthermore, the included studies were not of high enough quality to provide conclusive evidence that the compared techniques provided equivalent outcomes.
Topics: Hand Joints; Humans; Metacarpus; Osteoarthritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Thumb; Trapezium Bone
PubMed: 28368089
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004631.pub5 -
European Journal of Trauma and... Apr 2016Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of single, closed metacarpal shaft fractures is increasingly preferred over closed reduction and percutaneous fixation... (Review)
Review
Open reduction and internal fixation versus percutaneous transverse Kirschner wire fixation for single, closed second to fifth metacarpal shaft fractures: a systematic review.
PURPOSE
Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of single, closed metacarpal shaft fractures is increasingly preferred over closed reduction and percutaneous fixation (K-wire). The aim of this systematic review is to determine whether the preference for ORIF can be substantiated based on the available literature regarding the functional outcome and complications after surgery.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed using a computer-based search on MedLine and Embase, following the preferred reporting items for systematic and meta-analyses guidelines.
RESULTS
Five non-comparative studies were found. Two studies reported on 36 ORIF-treated patients. Three studies reported on 65 K-wire-treated patients. Complications were reported in 8 ORIF-treated patients (22 %) and in 23 K-wire-treated patients (35 %). Functional outcome was generally reported as good for both techniques. Nonetheless functional impairment requiring reoperation was reported in 6 ORIF-treated patients (17 %) and in none of the K-wire-treated patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Although for both techniques good functional outcomes were reported, the significance of the functional impairment after ORIF requiring reoperation suggests ORIF to be a less favorable technique for single, closed metacarpal shaft fractures.
Topics: Bone Wires; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Fractures, Bone; Hand Injuries; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Open Fracture Reduction; Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care
PubMed: 26038026
DOI: 10.1007/s00068-015-0507-y -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2015Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Surgery is used to treat persistent pain and dysfunction at the base of the thumb when conservative management, such as splinting, or medical management, such as oral analgesics, is no longer adequate in reducing disability and pain. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of different surgical techniques for trapeziometacarpal (thumb) osteoarthritis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following sources up to 08 August 2013: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1950 to August 2013), EMBASE (1974 to August 2013), CINAHL (1982 to August 2013), Clinicaltrials.gov (to August 2013) and World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Portal (to August 2013).
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs where the intervention was surgery for people with thumb osteoarthritis. Outcomes were pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. We excluded trials that compared non-surgical interventions with surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. Two review authors independently screened and included studies according to the inclusion criteria, assessed the risk of bias and extracted data, including adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 studies with 670 participants. Seven surgical procedures were identified (trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction and tendon interposition (LRTI), trapeziectomy, trapeziectomy with ligament reconstruction, trapeziectomy with interpositional arthroplasty (IA), Artelon joint resurfacing, arthrodesis and Swanson joint replacement).Most included studies had an unclear risk of most biases which raises doubt about the results. No procedure demonstrated any superiority over another in terms of pain, physical function, quality of life, patient global assessment, adverse events, treatment failure (re-operation) or trapeziometacarpal joint imaging. One study demonstrated a difference in adverse events (mild-moderate swelling) between Artelon joint replacement and trapeziectomy with tendon interposition. However, the quality of evidence was very low due to a high risk of bias and imprecision of results.Low quality evidence suggests trapeziectomy with LRTI may not provide additional benefits or result in more adverse events over trapeziectomy alone. Mean pain (three studies, 162 participants) was 26 mm on a 0 to 100 mm VAS (0 is no pain) for trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI reduced pain by a mean of 2.8 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.8 to 4.2) or an absolute reduction of 3% (-10% to 4%). Mean physical function (three studies, 211 participants) was 31.1 points on a 0 to 100 point scale (0 is best physical function, or no disability) with trapeziectomy alone, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in sightly lower function scores (standardised mean difference 0.1, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.32), an equivalent to a worsening of 0.2 points (95% CI -5.8 to 6.1) on a 0 to 100 point scale (absolute decrease in function 0.03% (-0.83% to 0.88%)). Low quality evidence from four studies (328 participants) indicates that the mean number of adverse events was 10 per 100 participants for trapeziectomy alone, and 19 events per 100 participants for trapeziectomy with LRTI (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.73) or an absolute risk increase of 9% (95% CI 0% to 28%). Low quality evidence from one study (42 participants) indicates that the mean scapho-metacarpal distance was 2.3 mm for the trapeziectomy alone group, trapeziectomy with LRTI resulted in a mean of 0.1 mm less distance (95% CI -0.81 to 0.61). None of the included trials reported global assessment, quality of life, and revision or re-operation rates.Low-quality evidence from two small studies (51 participants) indicated that trapeziectomy with LRTI may not improve function or slow joint degeneration, or produce additional adverse events over trapeziectomy and ligament reconstruction.We are uncertain of the benefits or harms of other surgical techniques due to the mostly low quality evidence from single studies and the low reporting rates of key outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with LRTI had additional benefit over arthrodesis or trapeziectomy with IA. There was also insufficient evidence to assess if trapeziectomy with IA had any additional benefit over the Artelon joint implant, the Swanson joint replacement or trapeziectomy alone.We did not find any studies that compared any other combination of the other techniques mentioned above or any other techniques including a sham procedure.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We did not identify any studies that compared surgery to sham surgery and we excluded studies that compared surgery to non-operative treatments. We were unable to demonstrate that any technique confers a benefit over another technique in terms of pain and physical function. Furthermore, the included studies were not of high enough quality to provide conclusive evidence that the compared techniques provided equivalent outcomes.
Topics: Hand Joints; Humans; Metacarpus; Osteoarthritis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Thumb; Trapezium Bone
PubMed: 25702783
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004631.pub4 -
Dento Maxillo Facial Radiology 2015To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to answer the question: is the cervical vertebrae maturation index (CVMI) effective to replace hand-wrist radiograph... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
To perform a systematic review with meta-analysis to answer the question: is the cervical vertebrae maturation index (CVMI) effective to replace hand-wrist radiograph (gold standard) in determining the pubertal growth spurt in patients undergoing bone growth?
METHODS
A search in three databases was performed, in which studies were selected that compared one of the two main assessment methods for cervical vertebrae (Hassel B, Farman AG. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 107: 58-66, or Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr. An improved version of the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of mandibular growth. Angle Orthod 2002; 72: 316-23) to a carpal assessment method. The main methodological data from each of the texts were collected and tabulated after. Later, the meta-analysis of the correlation coefficients obtained was performed.
RESULTS
19 articles were selected from an initial 206 articles collected. Regardless of the method used, the results of the meta-analysis showed that every article selected presented a positive correlation between skeletal maturation assessment performed by cervical vertebrae and carpal methods, with discrepancy of values between genders indicating higher correlation for the female gender (0.925; 0.878) than for the male (0.879; 0.842). When the assessment was performed without gender separation, correlation was significant (0.592; 0.688) but lower in the cases when genders were separated.
CONCLUSIONS
With the results of this meta-analysis, it is safe to affirm that both CVMIs used in the present study are reliable to replace the hand-wrist radiograph in predicting the pubertal growth spurt, considering that the highest values were found in female samples, especially in the method by Hassel and Farman.
Topics: Age Determination by Skeleton; Bone Development; Carpal Bones; Cervical Vertebrae; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Puberty; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 25521202
DOI: 10.1259/dmfr.20140270 -
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Apr 2014Trapeziometacarpal (TMC) arthritis of the thumb is a common source of hand pain and disability. TMC ligamentous instability may play a role in TMC degeneration. However,... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Trapeziometacarpal (TMC) arthritis of the thumb is a common source of hand pain and disability. TMC ligamentous instability may play a role in TMC degeneration. However, the relative importance of the TMC ligaments in the etiology of degeneration and the use of surgery to treat instability in early-stage arthritis are unclear.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
In this review, we addressed several questions: (1) What are the primary ligamentous stabilizers of the thumb TMC joint? (2) What is the evidence for ligament reconstruction or ligament imbrication in the treatment of thumb TMC joint osteoarthritis? And (3) what is the evidence for thumb metacarpal osteotomy in the treatment of thumb TMC joint osteoarthritis?
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of the literature using PubMed (MEDLINE(®)) and Scopus(®) (EMBASE(®)) for peer-reviewed articles published until November 2012. Fifty-two studies fit the inclusion criteria. Twenty-four studies were anatomic, biomechanical, or histopathologic studies on TMC joint ligamentous anatomy, 16 studies were clinical studies concerning ligament reconstruction, and 12 studies were clinical studies on thumb metacarpal osteotomy.
RESULTS
Over the past two decades, increasing evidence suggests the dorsoradial ligament is the most important stabilizer of the TMC joint. Other ligaments consistently identified are the superficial anterior oblique, deep anterior oblique, intermetacarpal, ulnar collateral, and posterior oblique ligaments. Ligament reconstruction and metacarpal osteotomy relieve pain and improve grip strength based on Level IV studies.
CONCLUSIONS
The dorsal ligaments are the primary stabilizers of the TMC joint. Ligament reconstruction and metacarpal osteotomy ameliorate ligamentous laxity and relieve pain based on Level IV studies.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Carpometacarpal Joints; Humans; Joint Instability; Ligaments; Osteoarthritis; Osteotomy; Range of Motion, Articular; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Trapezium Bone; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 23456188
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-2879-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2005Subcapital fractures of the fifth metacarpal bone, meaning fractures just below the knuckle of the little finger, account for approximately 20% of all hand fractures.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Subcapital fractures of the fifth metacarpal bone, meaning fractures just below the knuckle of the little finger, account for approximately 20% of all hand fractures. Currently, there is no consensus concerning the optimal management of these fractures. Traditionally, treatment consists of closed reduction and external splinting in a neutral position using plaster of Paris (POP), involving the metacarpal joint, the proximal interphalangeal joint and the carpo-metacarpal joint. An alternative treatment strategy is functional treatment using taping or bracing that does not restrict movement.
OBJECTIVES
To compare functional treatment with immobilization, and to compare different periods and types of immobilization, for the treatment of closed fifth metacarpal neck fractures in adults.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialized Register (July 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2004), OVID OldMEDLINE (1951 to 1965), OVID MEDLINE (1966 to July 2004), OVID MEDLINE In-Process (July 2004), EMBASE (1988 to 2004, week 29), the Internet, and reference lists of articles. No language restrictions were applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials which compare functional treatment with immobilization or different types of immobilization for closed fifth metacarpal neck fractures.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors assessed abstracts of all studies identified by the initial search, identified studies meeting the selection criteria, independently assessed the quality of the trial reports, and extracted and analysed the data.
MAIN RESULTS
Five studies met the inclusion criteria including a total of 252 participants. Most studies were of poor quality. The primary outcome measure, function of the hand, was not used in any studies. There was no evidence that any of the treatment modalities was statistically significantly superior.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
No included studies reported our primary outcome measure of interest, validated hand function. There was heterogeneity between the studies, which were of limited quality and size. No single non-operative treatment regimen for fracture of the neck of the fifth metacarpal can be recommended as superior to another in result. Further research is definitely warranted.
Topics: Bandages; Braces; Casts, Surgical; Finger Injuries; Fracture Fixation; Fractures, Bone; Humans; Metacarpal Bones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 16034891
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003210.pub3