Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24652419›Full record

Trial reportInternational orthopaedics2014

Proximal femoral nails compared with reverse distal femoral locking plates in intertrochanteric fractures with a compromised lateral wall; a randomised controlled trial.

Rehan Ul Haq, Vikrant Manhas, Amite Pankaj, Amit Srivastava, Ish Kumar Dhammi, Anil Kumar Jain

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International orthopaedics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. [Research progress on weak state of lateral wall in intertrochanteric fractures].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Reverse distal femoral locking compression plate (DF-LCP), does it fit and how to fit on Asian's proximal femurs? A cadaveric study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rehan Ul HaqDepartment of Orthopaedics, University College of Medical Sciences and GTB Hospital, New Delhi, India, docrehan@rediffmail.com.
Vikrant Manhas
Amite Pankaj
Amit Srivastava
Ish Kumar Dhammi
Anil Kumar Jain
University College of Medical Sciences · INGuru Teg Bahadur Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThere is no consensus about the best option of internal fixation for unstable intertrochanteric fractures. The aim of the present study was to compare proximal femoral nail (PFN) with contralateral reverse distal femoral locking compression plate (reverse-DFLCP) in the management of unstable intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall.

methodIn a randomized controlled study, from November 2011 to October 2012, 40 patients with unstable intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall (AO 31A 2.2 to 3.3) had osteosynthesis by PFN (n = 20) or reverse-DFLCP (n = 20). Intra-operative variables compared were duration of surgery, blood loss during surgery, fluoroscopy time and surgeons perception of the surgery. Patients were followed up clinically for a minimum of one year. Functional outcome was assessed by Parker Palmer mobility score (PPMS), Harris hip score (HHS), and Short Form-12. Failure was defined as any condition which would necessitate revision surgery with change of implant.

resultsDuration of surgery (p = 0.022), blood loss during surgery (p = 0.008) and fluoroscopy time (p = 0.0001) were significantly less in the PFN group than in the reverse-DFLCP group. No significant difference was found in type of reduction, difficulty in reduction and surgeon's perception of surgery. The PFN group had better functional outcome than the reverse-DFLCP group. HHS for the PFN group was 81.53 ± 13.21 and for the reverse-DFLCP group it was 68.43 ± 14.36 (p = 0.018). SF-12 physical (p = 0.002) and mental component (p = 0.007) scores in the PFN group was significantly better than in the reverse-DFLCP group. There was one failure in the PFN group as compared to six in the reverse-DFLCP group (p = 0.036).

conclusionDue to favourable intra-operative variables, better functional outcome and lower failure rates, we conclude that PFN is a better implant than reverse-DFLCP for intertrochanteric fractures with compromised lateral wall.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBone NailsBone PlatesFemaleFracture Fixation, InternalHip FracturesHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID24652419
PMCPMC4071479
OpenAlexW2030929828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.