Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35485475›Full record

ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2022

Functional and radiological comparison of three cephalomedullary nails with different designs used in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric femur fractures of elderly.

Furkan Yapıcı, Hanifi Üçpunar, Volkan Gür, Osman Onaç, Yakup Alpay, Reşit Karaköse, Yalkın Çamurcu

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Furkan YapıcıDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Facult of Medicine, Erzincan-Turkey.
Hanifi ÜçpunarDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Facult of Medicine, Erzincan-Turkey.
Volkan GürDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Facult of Medicine, Erzincan-Turkey.
Osman OnaçDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Bitlis State Hospital, Bitlis-Turkey.
Yakup AlpayDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Sultanbeyli State Hospital, İstanbul-Turkey.
Reşit KaraköseDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University Facult of Medicine, Erzincan-Turkey.
Yalkın ÇamurcuDepartment of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Atlas University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul-Turkey.
Erzincan University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study to compare three cephalomedullary nails (CMNs) with different designs in terms of complica-tion, reoperation, implant failure, mortality rates, and functional outcomes in the treatment of unstable intertrochanteric fractures (UIFs).

methodsThis retrospective study included patients with UIFs (AO/OTA type 31-A2 and 31-A3) who were treated with one of these CMNs (74 patients with Talon-PFN, 70 patients with PFN-III, and 69 patients with Intertan) between October 2014 and October 2018.

resultsA total of 213 patients (122 females and 91 males) with a mean age of 81.0±9.3 years have participated in this study. The mean follow-up time was 26.1±6.3 months. Malfixation was the most common complication and the most common reason of reop-eration for each type of CMN. Complication and reoperation rates, post-operative functional status, mean union times, and overall mortality rates were similar between groups. Mean operation/fluoroscopy time and mean blood loss were low in the Talon-PFN group, whereas the highest means of these parameters were in the PFN-III group. There were six (8.2%) implant failures in the Talon-PFN group and one (1.5%) in PFN-III group. No implant failure was seen in the Intertan group. The highest rate (58.6%) of anatomic reduc-tion was detected in PFN-III group.

conclusionOur study results showed that each implant type had its own advantages and disadvantages in the treatment of UIFs with similar functional and reoperation outcomes. Intertan was advantageous with its absence of implant failures. Talon-PFN decreased the operation/fluoroscopy time and intraoperative blood loss but had the highest implant failure rate. There was a need for more anatomic reduction to centralize two separate parallel lag screws in the femoral neck in PFN-III group, and that costs operation/fluo-roscopy time and blood loss. Malfixation, which was the most common cause of complications and reoperations, should be avoided.

Indexed as

Bone NailsHip FracturesAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFemurHumansMaleNailsRadiographyRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID35485475
PMCPMC10442976
OpenAlexW3112826823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.