SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2005
Intramedullary nails for extracapsular hip fractures in adults.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intramedullary nails for extracapsular hip fractures in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Condylocephalic nails versus extramedullary implants for extracapsular hip fractures.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2000Pooled it
- Stabilizing the Unstable: Cone Hemiarthroplasty in Geriatric Intertrochanteric Fractures.Arthroplasty today · 2026Article
- Reduced complication rates for unstable trochanteric fractures managed with third-generation nails: Gamma 3 nail versus PFNA.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2020Observational
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntramedullary nails may be used for the surgical fixation of extracapsular hip fractures in adults. They may be inserted from the top (cephalocondylic) or from the bottom (condylocephalic) end of the femur.
objectivesTo compare different types or design modifications of intramedullary nails used in the fixation of extracapsular hip fractures. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Injuries Group specialised register (September 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to September week 1 2004), EMBASE (1988 to 2004 Week 37), the UK National Research Register Issue 2, 2004, several orthopaedic journals, conference proceedings and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised or quasi-randomised trials comparing different types of intramedullary nails or modifications to the design of intramedullary nails in the treatment of extracapsular hip fractures in adults. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Additional information was sought from all trialists. MAIN
resultsFour studies, involving a total of 834 predominantly female and older patients with mainly unstable trochanteric fractures, were included. All trials compared different designs of cephalocondylic nail. Allocation concealment was likely in one trial, not described in two and not done in the fourth. Two studies, with 674 participants, compared the proximal femoral nail versus the Gamma nail. Blood transfusion was greater for the proximal femoral nail group in one trial, yet blood loss was less in this group in the other trial. Pooled data for re-operation (relative risk 1.08, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.81) and mortality (relative risk 1.24, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.71) showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups. Limited data for long term function also showed no statistically significant differences. The two other studies, with 80 participants each, found respectively no differences between a gliding nail versus a Gamma nail; and a dynamically versus a statically locked intramedullary hip screw. AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe limited evidence from the randomised trials undertaken to date is insufficient to determine if there are important differences in outcome between different designs of intramedullary nails used in the internal fixation of extracapsular hip fractures. Given the evidence of superiority of the sliding hip screw compared with intramedullary nails for extracapsular hip fractures, further studies comparing different designs of intramedullary nails are not a priority. Any new design should be evaluated in a randomised comparison with the sliding hip screw.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.