ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction2007
The dynamic condylar screw in the management of subtrochanteric fractures: does judicious use of biological fixation enhance overall results?
Article in Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Subtrochanteric fractures are fraught with certain anatomic, biologic and biomechanical challenges. Evolution of implants like the Gamma nail, fixed-angle nail plates, compression hip screws and dynamic hip screws with trochanteric stabilization plates underlines a persistent quest for a better implant. We studied the dynamic condylar screw DCS as an implant on a series of 30 consecutive patients with subtrochanteric fractures. Our purpose was to assess this implant as a panacea for subtrochanteric fractures. All cases of AO type A and B were anatomically fixed, whereas type C was biologically plated. The idea was to assess the applicability and adaptability of the DCS. Fractures in 29 cases united, with one patient suffering from an implant failure. There were 17 excellent, 5 good, 5 fair and 3 poor results. The DCS is a definite advance over previous methods of treatment; when combined with the utilization of biological fixation techniques for comminuted fractures, can be relied upon to treat all types of subtrochanteric fractures.
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.