SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2014
Is helical blade superior to screw design in terms of cut-out rate for elderly trochanteric fractures? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative outcome of PFNA, Gamma nails, PCCP, Medoff plate, LISS and dynamic hip screws for fixation in elderly trochanteric fractures: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2017Pooled it
- Controversies in the Treatment Strategies of Intertrochanteric Fractures: A Scoping Review and Discussion of a Literature-Based Algorithm.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Lag Screw Design Is a Predictor for Cut-Out Complication After Intertrochanteric Femur Fracture Treatment in Elderly. A Comparative Analysis.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Which head element is more effective for cement augmentation of TFNA? Helical blade versus lag screw.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Intramedullary Femur Nailing in Intertrochanteric Fractures: Postoperatively Do Helical Blades Migrate More Than Lag Screws? A Randomized Controlled Trial.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Morphological analysis of posterior-medial intertrochanteric fracture patterns using fracture-mapping technique.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Cement detachment from the cephalic blade in an intertrochanteric fracture fixation - A case report.Trauma case reports · 2021Article
- Gamma 3 U-Blade lag screws in patients with trochanteric femur fractures: are rotation control lag screws better than others?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
- Trochanteric Fixation Nail® with Helical Blade Compared with Femoral Neck Screw for Operative Treatment of Intertrochanteric Femoral Fractures.Hip & pelvis · 2019Article
- Intertrochanteric fractures: a review of fixation methods.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2016Review
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 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis meta-analysis was conducted to investigate whether helical blade implant system had advantages in terms of cut-out rate when compared to screw implant system for trochanteric fractures of elderly population.
methodsThe databases of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and OVID were searched from inception to September 2013, and all randomized controlled trials comparing outcomes between helical blade system and screw system in treating trochanteric fractures were selected. Three researchers assessed the methodological quality and extracted data of the enrolled studies independently. Data were analysed using Review Manager 5.1 version.
resultsSix studies including 759 patients were involved. Results revealed that compared with screw group, blade group had similar outcomes of "centre-centre" position (95% CI 0.89-1.06, P = 0.48) and tip-apex distance (95% CI-0.08 to 1.31, P = 0.08). Cut-out and other complications were also comparable between the two groups (95% CI 0.34-1.54, P = 0.41; 95% CI 0.73-1.32, P = 0.90). Operation time and fluoroscopy time of blade group were significantly less than that of screw group (95% CI -5.13 to -3.70, P < 0.00001; 95% CI -32.50 to -27.07, P < 0.00001). Outcome of post-operative function was similar between two groups (95% CI 0.94-1.15, P = 0.45).
conclusionsBlade group required less operation time and fluoroscopy time than that of screw group treating trochanteric fractures in the elderly, but the differences observed could be biased due to grouping and other limitations. Outcomes of cut-out complication, other complications, position of implant and post-operative function were similar between two groups.
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.