What do systematic reviews say?

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 112 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

It is very uncertain whether surgical intervention changes pain: presence of pain (slight or moderate) at 1 year compared with conservative intervention (very low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.32 [0.54, 3.19]
  1 study · 79 participants
  Very low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

It is very uncertain whether surgical intervention changes treatment failure (usually requiring a subsequent operation) at 1 year compared with conservative intervention (very low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.99 [0.51, 1.94]
  6 studies · 342 participants
  Very low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

Surgical intervention showed no clear difference in number of participants to return to work/sport ‐ at 1 year compared with conservative intervention (low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.96 [0.85, 1.1]
  2 studies · 137 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  2 studies · 122 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

It is very uncertain whether surgical intervention changes participants with adverse events at 1 year compared with conservative intervention (very low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.82 [1.65, 4.82]
  6 studies · 342 participants
  Very low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

It is very uncertain whether surgical intervention changes patient dissatisfaction with the cosmetic result at 1 yearh compared with conservative intervention (very low certainty).

• Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.34 [0.07, 1.62]
  1 study · 70 participants
  Very low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs non‐surgical treatment

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Surgical interventions for symptomatic mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 101 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

Surgical interventions probably leads to lower unacceptable malunion Assessed by imaging compared with conservative interventions (moderate certainty).

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.29 [0.15, 0.59]
  4 studies · 264 participants
  Moderate

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

Surgical interventions may leads to higher serious adverse events compared with conservative interventions (low certainty).

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 2.39 [1.1, 5.17]
  4 studies · 264 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 46 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 101 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

Surgical interventions may leads to higher parent satisfaction Rated as excellent or good compared with conservative interventions (low certainty).

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 1.34 [1.05, 1.73]
  1 study · 46 participants
  Low

Surgical interventions (exploration and decompression / external neurolysis, internal neurolysis, neurorrhaphy / direct repair, neuroma excision, anastomosis, autologous or allograft nerve grafting or tubulization) vs conservative interventions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for treating femoral shaft fractures in children and adolescents 2014 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

One active intervention (surgical, medical, or psychological) vs A different active intervention (direct head-to-head comparison)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for iatrogenic inferior alveolar and lingual nerve injury 2014 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Discussion: 'There is also a lack of trials directly comparing these methods ...'. No eligible RCT directly comparing different active interventions.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Non-surgical interventions vs Surgical interventions

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for replacing missing teeth: treatment of peri‐implantitis 2012 · Cochrane All outcomes
  Non-surgical versus surgical interventions: no trials.
  0 studies
  No studies found

Primary surgical intervention (curettage, peripheral osteotomy, or resection) vs Primary non-surgical intervention (intralesional corticosteroids, subcutaneous calcitonin, interferon alpha, or imatinib)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) of the jaws 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Primary surgical intervention (curettage, peripheral osteotomy, or resection) vs Primary non-surgical intervention (intralesional corticosteroids, subcutaneous calcitonin, interferon alpha, or imatinib)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) of the jaws 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found

Primary surgical intervention (curettage, peripheral osteotomy, or resection) vs Primary non-surgical intervention (intralesional corticosteroids, subcutaneous calcitonin, interferon alpha, or imatinib)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Interventions for central giant cell granuloma (CGCG) of the jaws 2009 · Cochrane All outcomes
  no estimate extracted
  0 studies
  No studies found