ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2010
Comparing two intramedullary devices for treating trochanteric fractures: a prospective study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 3 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- What patient reported outcome measures are used in clinical trials in hip fracture? A systematic mapping review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Pooled it
- Surgical interventions for treating extracapsular hip fractures in older adults: a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Intramedullary nails for extracapsular hip fractures in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Article
- Assessing potential factors leading to perioperative peri-implant fracture in femoral pertrochanteric fracture osteosynthesis using the proximal femoral nail antirotation 2: A retrospective study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Perioperative peri-implant fracture after osteosynthesis for geriatric femoral pertrochanteric fracture with the linear compression integrated screw intramedullary nail system (INTERTAN™): a retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Risk factors for cut-out in intertrochanteric fractures treated with proximal femoral nail of double proximal screw design.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2022Article
- Article
- A preliminary experience with a new intramedullary nail for trochanteric fractures.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Article
- Preliminary experience with EBA ONE intramedullary nail for the treatment of pertrochanteric fractures.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2019Article
- Similar function and complications for patients with short versus long hip nailing for unstable pertrochanteric fractures.SICOT-J · 2018Article
- Analysis of trabecular bone microstructure in osteoporotic femoral heads in human patients: in vivo study using multidetector row computed tomography.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2016Article
- Failure of intertrochanteric nailing due to distal nail jamming.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2013Article
- Dual lag screw cephalomedullary nail versus the classic sliding hip screw for the stabilization of intertrochanteric fractures. A prospective randomized study.Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntertrochanteric fractures are surgically treated by using different methods and implants. The optional type of surgical stabilization is still under debate. However, between devices with the same philosophy, different design characteristics may substantially influence fracture healing. This is a prospective study comparing the complication and final functional outcome of two intramedullary devices, the intramedullary hip screw (IMHS) and the ENDOVIS nail. MATERIALS AND
methodsTwo hundred fifteen patients were randomized on admission in two treatment groups. Epidemiology features and functional status was similar between two treatment groups. Fracture stability was assessed according to the Evan's classification. One hundred ten patients were treated with IMHS and 105 with ENDOVIS nail.
resultsThere were no significant statistical differences between the two groups regarding blood loss, transfusion requirements and mortality rate. In contrast, the number of total complications was significantly higher in the ENDOVIS nail group. Moreover, the overall functional and walking competence was superior in the patients treated with the IMHS nail.
conclusionsThese results indicate that the choice of the proper implant plays probably an important role in the final outcome of surgical treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. IMHS nail allows for accurate surgical technique, for both static and dynamic compression and high rotational stability. IMHS nail proved more reliable in our study regarding nail insertion and overall uncomplicated outcome.
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.