Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25568527›Full record

ArticleMedical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina)2014

Proximal femoral nail antirotation in treatment of fractures of proximal femur.

Sahmir Sadic, Svemir Custovic, Mahir Jasarevic, Mirsad Fazlic, Nedim Smajic, Asmir Hrustic, Aleksandar Vujadinovic, Ferid Krupic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical archives (Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sahmir SadicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Svemir CustovicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Mahir JasarevicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Mirsad FazlicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Nedim SmajicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Asmir HrusticOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Aleksandar VujadinovicOrthopedic and Traumatology Clinic, University Clinical Centre, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Ferid KrupicDepartment of Orthopedic, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFractures of the proximal femur and hip are relatively common injuries in adults and common source of morbidity and mortality among the elderly. Many methods have been recommended for the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures. MATERIAL AND

methodsWe retrospective analyzed all the patients with fractures of the hip treated with proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) at the Clinic of Orthopedic and Traumatology, University Clinical Centre Tuzla from the first of January 2012 to 31 December 2012 years. The study included 63 patients averaged 73.6±11.9 years (range, 29 to 88 years). Fracture type was classified as intertrochanteric (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen classification 31.A.1, A.2 and A.3) and subtrochanteric fractures (Seinsheimer classification). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The ratio between the genders female-male was 1.6:1. There was statistically significant difference prevalence of female compared to male patients (p=0.012). There were 31 left and 32 right hip fractured. Low energy trauma was the cause of fractures in 57(90.5%) patients. Averaged waiting time for hospitalization was 3.2±7.5 days (range, 0 to 32 days). 44 patients were admitted the same day upon injuring. The average waiting time for the treatment was 3.6±5.7 days. The ratio between with or without co-existent disease was 4.7:1. During the three months postoperatively with ASA score 3 and 4 six patients died. There were no significant differences in deaths from ASA score 1 and 2 (p=0.52). Reoperation for the treatment of implant or fracture-related complications was required in three (4.7%) patients (infection, reimplantation and extraction). Three patient developed deep vein thrombosis. Statistically significant difference was found in the deaths in the first three months compared to the next three months (p=0.02). We found statistically significant difference between pre-injury and postoperative mobility score (p=0.0001).

conclusionPFNA is an excellent device for osteosynthesis as it can be easily inserted. Moreover, it provides stable fixation, which allows early full weightbearing mobilization of the patient.

Indexed as

Bone NailsFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBosnia and HerzegovinaComorbidityFemaleFemoral FracturesGuideline AdherenceHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPractice Guidelines as TopicReoperationfemorisfracturemobilityPFNA

Identifiers

PMID25568527
PMCPMC4240330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.