Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34107990›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2021

Clinical outcome of femoral neck system versus cannulated compression screws for fixation of femoral neck fracture in younger patients.

Huaijian Hu, Jingbo Cheng, Mingli Feng, Zhihua Gao, Jingwei Wu, Shibao Lu

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Association between screw angulation and union after inverted-triangle cannulated screw fixation of femoral neck fractures.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Huaijian HuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China.
Jingbo Cheng *Department of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China. 18683956@qq.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5664-1358
Mingli Feng *Department of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China. fengmingli6666@163.com.
Zhihua GaoDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China.
Jingwei WuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China.
Shibao LuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical University, Changchun Street 45, Xicheng District, Beijing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical outcome of a new fixation device (femoral neck system, FNS) for femoral neck fractures remains unclear. The main purpose of this study was to evaluate two different internal fixation methods for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in patients aged under 60 years.

methodsWe retrospectively studied patients who underwent internal fixation surgery in our hospital for femoral neck fractures between January 2017 and January 2020. Cannulated compression screws (CCS) and FNS groups were divided according to different internal fixation methods. General data (such as sex, age, body mass index, type of fracture) of all patienFemoral neck shorteningts were collected, and joint function was evaluated using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) before and 1 year after surgery. We recorded related surgical complications, including femoral head necrosis, nonunion, and femoral neck shortening.

resultsThere were no significant differences in age, sex, or body mass index between the two groups. There was no statistical difference in HHSs between the two groups before surgery. Patients who underwent FNS treatment had longer surgery time (79.75 ± 26.35 min vs. 64.58 ± 18.56 min, p = 0.031) and more blood loss (69.45 ± 50.47 mL vs. 23.71 ± 28.13 mL, p < 0.001). The degree of femoral neck shortening in the FNS group was significantly lower than that in the CCS group (10.0% vs 37.5%, p = 0.036). Regarding postoperative complications, there was no statistical difference in the incidence of femoral head necrosis and fracture nonunion between the two groups.

conclusionPatients younger than 60 with femoral neck fractures can obtain satisfactory clinical results with CCS or FNS treatment. FNS has excellent biomechanical properties and shows significantly higher overall construct stability.

Indexed as

Bone ScrewsAdultAge FactorsBlood Loss, SurgicalFemaleFemoral Neck FracturesFemur NeckFracture Fixation, InternalHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCannulated screwsFemoral neck fractureFemoral neck systemHarris Hip ScoreSurgical fixation devices

Identifiers

PMID34107990
PMCPMC8188789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.