ArticleJSES international2022
Technical considerations and early results of magnetic compressive intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft delayed unions and nonunions.
Article in JSES international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Technical considerations and early results of magnetic compressive intramedullary nailing for tibial and femoral shaft non-unions: a case series.Annals of joint · 2026Article
- Clinical compatibility of magnetic resonance imaging with magnetic intramedullary nails: a feasibility study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Biomechanics of fracture healing: how best to optimize your construct in the OR.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2024Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Expandable magnetic rods and intramedullary nails are being used in a number of innovative ways, including limb length discrepancy and scoliosis correction. However, recently, the full complement of these devices has been further explored, with the utilization of their compressive capacity to improve fracture healing. The purpose of the present study was to report on early results of compressive magnetic intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft delayed unions and nonunions. Methods: This retrospective case series was completed at a level 1 trauma center, with adult patients who underwent compressive intramedullary nailing from 2017 to 2021 for humeral shaft nonunion or delayed union. The primary indication for this procedure was nonunion in the setting of previous conventional fixation, but a subset of patients with atrophic nonunions and risk factors for recalcitrant nonunion were also included. Results: Fourteen patients, with a mean age of 51 ± 17 years, underwent compressive magnetic intramedullary nailing. Nine patients had previously underwent surgery, 6 of which had undergone multiple prior procedures. Five others were initially treated nonoperatively and underwent surgery 4.1 ± 2.9 months out from injury. Ten patients went on to union at a mean of 2.9 ± 2.4 months. One patient experienced hardware failure with nail cut-out at 2 weeks, and one required revision surgery for a wound infection. Three other patients were lost to follow-up, one of which was deceased for reasons unrelated to surgery. Conclusion: Compressive magnetic intramedullary nails are a viable solution for complex humeral shaft nonunions, particularly in the setting of previously well-fixed fractures and those at risk of recalcitrant nonunion. However, comparative and prospective studies looking at union rates and secondary procedures are needed to more clearly define their role in treatment and assure their safety, given recent concerns regarding osteolysis at the nail modular junction.
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.