ArticleChinese medical journal2020
Loss of the posteromedial support: a risk factor for implant failure after fixation of AO 31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures.
Article in Chinese medical journal, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- The clinical efficacy of Medial Sustain Nail(MSN) and Proximal femoral nail anti-rotation(PFNA) for fixation of medial comminuted trochanteric fractures: a prospective randomized controlled trial.International orthopaedics · 2024Trial
- The predictive value of proximal femoral CT attenuation in intramedullary fixation failure of intertrochanteric fractures: a retrospective cohort analysis.Archives of osteoporosis · 2025Article
- Complications and risk factors after internal fixation of femoral neck fractures in young and middle-aged patients.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Risk factors for implant failure of PFNA-II in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures (AO/OTA 31 A1 and A2).BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- The influence of proximal femur CT value on stress distribution and stability in intertrochanteric fracture after PFNA fixation: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- The proximal femoral universal nail system (PFUN): a novel intramedullary nail for treating complex proximal femoral fractures and its biomechanical comparison with the proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA).Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Key Decision-Making in Post-Failed Internal Fixation of Intertrochanteric Fractures Hip Arthroplasty: A Multicenter Retrospective Study on Fracture Healing's Impact on Femoral Component Selection.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- A machine learning model for predicting postoperative complication risk in young and middle-aged patients with femoral neck fractures.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Hip arthroplasty following failure of internal fixation in intertrochanteric femoral fractures: classification decision-making for femoral stem selection and clinical validation.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Efficacy of poller screw in addition to lag screw in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures with proximal femoral nail: a biomechanical evaluation.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Article
- Development of early complications after treatment of trochanteric fractures with an intramedullary sliding hip screw in a geriatric population.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024Article
- Predictive value of tip-apex distance and calcar-referenced tip-apex distance for cut-out in 398 femoral intertrochanteric fractures treated in a private practice with dynamic intramedullary nailing.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Predictors of and predictive nomogram for cut-out of proximal femur nail anti-rotation device in intertrochanteric fractures.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Trochanteric and subtrochanteric fractures irreducible by closed reduction: a retrospective study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Article
- Reduction with Pre-Drilling Combined with a Finger Reduction Tool in Difficult-to-Reduce Intertrochanteric Fracture.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- A comprehensive 3D CT based classification of intertrochanteric fracture.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2022Article
- Risk factors for cut-outs in geriatric intertrochanteric fractures with cephalomedullary nailing after obtaining acceptable reduction: a case-control study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- CalTAD is the Key Evaluation Tool for Measurement of Cephalic Fixation Position for Predicting Cut-Out in Geriatric Intertrochanteric Fracture Patients with Internal Fixations after Achieving Acceptable Reduction.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Prognostic Factors of 1-Year Postoperative Functional Outcomes of Older Patients with Intertrochanteric Fractures in Thailand: A Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The lesser trochanter "Sling fixation technique" in proximal intramedullary nailing of unstable intertrochanteric fractures: A polymer-based cerclage wiring.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to analyze cases of AO31-A2 intertrochanteric fractures (ITFs) and to identify the relationship between the loss of the posteromedial support and implant failure.
methodsThree hundred ninety-four patients who underwent operative treatment for ITF from January 2003 to December 2017 were enrolled. Focusing on posteromedial support, the A2 ITFs were divided into two groups, namely, those with (Group A, n = 153) or without (Group B, n = 241) posteromedial support post-operatively, and the failure rates were compared. Based on the final outcomes (failed or not), we allocated all of the patients into two groups: failed (Group C, n = 66) and normal (Group D, n = 328). We separately analyzed each dataset to identify the factors that exhibited statistically significant differences between the groups. In addition, a logistic regression was conducted to identify whether the loss of posteromedial support of A2 ITFs was an independent risk factor for fixation failure. The basic factors were age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, side of affected limb, fixation method (intramedullary or extramedullary), time from injury to operation, blood loss, operative time and length of stay.
resultsThe failure rate of group B (58, 24.07%) was significantly higher than that of group A (8, 5.23%) (χ = 23.814, P < 0.001). Regarding Groups C and D, the comparisons of the fixation method (P = 0.005), operative time (P = 0.001), blood loss (P = 0.002) and length of stay (P = 0.033) showed that the differences were significant. The logistic regression revealed that the loss of posteromedial support was an independent risk factor for implant failure (OR = 5.986, 95% CI: 2.667-13.432) (P < 0.001).
conclusionsFor AO31-A2 ITFs, the loss of posteromedial support was an independent risk factor for fixation failure. Therefore, posteromedial wall reconstruction might be necessary for the effective treatment of A2 fractures that lose posteromedial support.
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.