ArticleScientific reports2021
Multiple screw fixation versus cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femur neck fracture using a nationwide hip fracture registry.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Screw fixation versus hemiarthroplasty for undisplaced femoral neck fractures in the elderly: a meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Pooled it
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cementless bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) recently gained popularity as a treatment for femur neck fracture (FNF), but there have been few studies comparing this with multiple screw fixation (MSF) in the elderly population. The purpose of this study is to compare (1) surgery-related parameters, (2) reoperation rate as a local complication, (3) in-hospital systemic complication rate, and (4) mortality rate at 1 year after MSF and cementless BHA in patients with FNF using nationwide data. Six-hundred sixty-six hips (aged ≥ 50 years) extracted from nationwide Hip Fracture Registry were included in this study (133 MSF and 533 cementless BHA). One hundred fifty-six hips were divided into nondisplaced FNF (Group A) and 510 into displaced FNF (Group B). We evaluated (1) surgery-related parameters (anesthesia type, time to surgery, operation time, estimated blood loss and volume of postoperative transfusion), (2) the rate of and reasons for reoperation, (3) the rate and type of in-hospital systemic complications and (4) one-year mortality rate after surgery. In Group A, MSF showed shorter operation time (p = 0.004) and lower incidence of in-hospital systemic complications (p = 0.003). In Group B, cementless BHA demonstrated lower reoperation rate than MSF (p < 0.001). In both Group A and B, cementless BHA was associated with higher estimated blood loss than MSF (p < 0.001). Based on findings in our study, MSF might be a more favorable option for nondisplaced FNF, whereas cementless BHA might be a better one for displaced FNF in patients older than fifty. Nevertheless, our nationwide study also showed that numbers of cementless BHAs were being performed for nondisplaced FNF even in teaching hospitals.
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.