SynthesisMedicine2018
Is dynamic locking plate superior than other implants for intracapsular hip fracture: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic hip screws versus cannulated screws for femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- Outcomes of Headed and Headless Cannulated Screws Fixation in Nondisplaced Femoral Neck Fracture.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Dynamic Locking Plate versus Multiple Cancellous Screws for the Fixation of Intracapsular Femoral Neck Fractures: Long-Term Results and Quality-Of-Life Assessment Based on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe studied the safety and efficacy of dynamic locking plate vs. other implants (cannulated cancellous screws [CCS] or sliding hip screw [SHS]) in patients undergoing intracapsular hip fracture (ICHF).
methodsWe searched Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Google database from inception to March 25, 2018. We selected any studies comparing dynamic locking plate for treatment ICHF. Non-union rate, osteonecrosis rate, cutout rate, revision rate, the replacement rate, and Harris hip scores were the outcomes. Stata 12.0 was used for meta-analysis.
resultsFour studies involving 419 patients (143 patients in the dynamic locking plate group and 276 patients in the other implants group) were finally included. Compared with CCS or SHS, dynamic locking plate was associated with a reduction of nonunion rate, revision rate, replacement rate (P <.05). Furthermore, dynamic locking plate was also associated with an increase of the Harris hip scores (P <.05). There was no significant difference between the osteonecrosis rate and cutout rate (P >.05).
conclusionsCurrent meta-analysis revealed that dynamic locking plate has a benefit role in improving postoperative clinical outcome than CCS or SHS in ICHF patients. Further high quality and large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to further identify the efficacy of dynamic locking plate for ICHF.
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.