ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2013
Intramedullary nails result in more reoperations than sliding hip screws in two-part intertrochanteric fractures.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 4 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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extramedullary versus intramedullary fixation of stable trochanteric femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Does intramedullary nail have advantages over dynamic hip screw for the treatment of AO/OTA31A1-A3? A meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Pooled it
- Comparing the costs and outcomes of an integrated twin compression screw (ITCS) nail with standard of care using a single lag screw or a single helical blade cephalomedullary nail in patients with intertrochanteric hip fractures.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2018Pooled it
- Comparison of a twin interlocking derotation and compression screw cephalomedullary nail (InterTAN) with a single screw derotation cephalomedullary nail (proximal femoral nail antirotation): a systematic review and meta-analysis for intertrochanteric fractures.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2018Pooled it
- Clinical Outcome of the Oblique Locking Hip Screw.Advances in orthopedics · 2025Article
- Comparing Intramedullary Nails versus Dynamic Hip Screws in the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures on Post-operative Rehabilitation Outcomes - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2025Review
- Forces required to dynamize sliding screws in gamma nail and selfdynamizable internal fixator.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Hip Fracture Repair by the Post-Call Surgeon: A Multicenter Retrospective Review.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024Article
- Endovis Nail versus Dynamic Hip Screw for Unstable Pertrochanteric Fractures: A Feasibility Randomised Control Trial including Patients with Cognitive Impairment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Biomechanical comparison of the undercut thread designFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- Article
- Cephalomedullary nailing versus sliding hip screws for Intertrochanteric and basicervical hip fractures: a propensity-matched study of short-term outcomes in over 17,000 patients.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020Article
- Improved outcome after hip fracture surgery in Norway.Acta orthopaedica · 2017Article
- Comparison and analysis of reoperations in two different treatment protocols for trochanteric hip fractures - postoperative technical complications with dynamic hip screw, intramedullary nail and Medoff sliding plate.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2017Observational
- Poor relation between biomechanical and clinical studies for the proximal femoral locking compression plate.Acta orthopaedica · 2017Review
- Proximal femoral nail antirotation versus dynamic hip screw fixation for treatment of osteoporotic type 31-A1 intertrochanteric femoral fractures in elderly patients.The Journal of international medical research · 2017Article
- The tip-apex distance in the X-Bolt dynamic plating system.Bone & joint research · 2017Article
- Dynamic Hip Screw with Trochanteric Stablization Plate Fixation of Unstable Inter-Trochanteric Fractures: A Prospective Study of Functional and Radiological Outcomes.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2016Article
- Quality of life following hip fractures: results from the Norwegian hip fracture register.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2016Article
- Recent advances in the treatment of hip fractures in the elderly.F1000Research · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSliding hip screws (SHSs) and intramedullary (IM) nails are well-documented implants for simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures; however, there is no consensus regarding which type of implant is better. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked whether patients with simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures treated with IM nailing had (1) a lower reoperation rate and (2) less pain and better quality of life than patients treated with SHSs.
methodsWe used data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register on 7643 operations for simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA Type A1) treated with an SHS (n=6355) or an IM nail (n=1288) between 2005 and 2010. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess reoperation percentages and a Cox regression model was used to assess the risk of reoperation. Questionnaires regarding pain and quality of life were answered by the patients at 4, 12, and 36 months postoperatively.
resultsWe found an increased risk of reoperation after IM nailing within 1 postoperative year: 2.4% and 4.2% for SHS and IM nails, respectively. The difference persisted with time: 4.5% and 7.1% at 3 years. We also found minor differences for pain and quality of life which we judged clinically unimportant.
conclusionsBased on our findings and a critical review of the literature, we suggest an SHS is likely the preferred implant for simple two-part intertrochanteric fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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.