ArticleRevista brasileira de ortopedia
Lateral decubitus for treating pertrochanteric fractures using cephalomedullary nails.
Article in Revista brasileira de ortopedia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of operative position on rotational alignment after intramedullary nailing of trochanteric fractures: a comparative analysis of lateral decubitus versus supine position.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Article
- Article
- Comparative study between lateral decubitus and traction table for treatment of pertrochanteric fractures with cephalomedullary nails.Revista brasileira de ortopediaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo perform a retrospective radiographic evaluation on the fracture reduction and implant position in the femoral head among patients with pertrochanteric fractures who had been treated using a cephalomedullary nail in lateral decubitus; and to assess factors that might interfere with the quality of the fracture reduction and with the implant position in using this technique.
methodsNineteen patients with a diagnosis of pertrochanteric fractures of the femur who had been treated using cephalomedullary nails in lateral decubitus were evaluated. For outpatient radiographic evaluations, we used the anteroposterior view of the pelvis and lateral view of the side affected. We measured the cervicodiaphyseal angle, tip-apex distance (TAD), spatial position of the cephalic element in relation to the head, and the bispinal diameter. To make an anthropometric assessment, we used the body mass index. Two groups of patients were created: one in which all the criteria were normal (TAD ≤25 mm, cervicodiaphyseal angle between 130° and 135° and cephalic implant position in the femoral head in the central-central quadrant); and another group presenting alterations in some of the criteria for best prognosis.
resultsFemale patients predominated (57.9%) and the mean age was 60 years. Seven patients presented a central-central cephalic implant position. One patient present a cervicodiaphyseal angle >135° and the maximum TAD was 32 mm; consequently, 12 patients presented some altered criteria (63.2%). None of the characteristics evaluated differed between the patients with all their criteria normal and those with some altered criteria, or showed any statistically significant association among them (p > 0.05).
conclusionThe technique described here enabled good reduction and good positioning of the implant, independent of the anthropometric indices and type of fracture.
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.