Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33575858›Full record

ReviewInternational orthopaedics2021

The history of intramedullary nailing.

Achilles Bekos, Spyridon Sioutis, Andreas Kostroglou, Theodosios Saranteas, Andreas F Mavrogenis

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International orthopaedics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Load Transfer in Tibial Intramedullary Nailing: Effects of Fracture Level, Screw Configuration and Nail-Canal Clearance.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. External fixation to intramedullary nailing for femoral and tibial fractures: an eleven-year cohort study at a level I trauma center.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Achilles BekosFirst Department of Orthopaedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Spyridon SioutisFirst Department of Orthopaedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Andreas KostroglouSecond Department of Anesthesiology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Theodosios SaranteasSecond Department of Anesthesiology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece.
Andreas F MavrogenisFirst Department of Orthopaedics, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Medicine, Athens, Greece. afm@otenet.gr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0807-0719
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo summarize the evolution of intramedullary nailing, highlight important milestones, introduce the atmosphere of the era concerning the first uses and development of intramedullary nailing, and present the status of nailing in modern international orthopaedics and traumatology.

methodA thorough literature search was undertaken in PubMed and Google Scholar as well as in physical books in libraries to summarize the literature on the history and evolution of intramedullary nailing.

resultsThe first use of an intramedullary device was attested in ancient Egypt; however, the first use of intramedullary nailing was reported in 1524 in Mexico, and the first medical journals reported on intramedullary nailing around the mid-1800s. The evolutions of intramedullary nailing including approach, material, cross-section and shape, and reaming technique occurred in the twentieth century. During the 1960s, intramedullary nailing was abandoned in favour of plate and screws osteosynthesis; however, in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, a surge of novelties including flexible reaming, interlocking, and use of image intensification and titanium nails led to the advent of the second-generation intramedullary nailing. Today, intramedullary nailing has become the standard treatment of long bone fractures with low infection rates, small scars, excellent stabilization of the fractures, and immediate mobilization of the patients.

conclusionIntramedullary nailing has revolutionized the treatment of long bone fractures. However, with numerous nail designs, a lot of information on their efficacy is lacking. Considerably more work will need to be done to determine the optimal nail specifications.

Indexed as

Fracture Fixation, IntramedullaryFractures, BoneBone NailsBone PlatesFracture Fixation, InternalHumansDynamizationInterlockingIntramedullary nailingOrthopaedic heritageWorking length

Identifiers

PMID33575858
OpenAlexW3128993766

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.