Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36533207›Full record

ArticleGeriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation2022

Simulating Prophylactic Fixation Methods for Osteoporotic Femoral Neck Fracture Prevention.

Gregory R Roytman, Alim F Ramji, Brian Beitler, Brad Yoo, Michael P Leslie, Michael Baumgaertner, Steven M Tommasini, Daniel H Wiznia

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gregory R RoytmanOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5029-3433
Alim F RamjiOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Brian BeitlerOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Brad YooOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Michael P LeslieOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Michael BaumgaertnerOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Steven M TommasiniOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Daniel H WizniaOrthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3987-0364
Yale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Geriatric patients who suffer femoral neck fractures have high morbidity and mortality. Prophylactic fixation of the femoral neck is a potential avenue to reduce the incidence of femoral neck fractures. We studied 3 different implants traditionally used to stabilize the femoral neck: 6.5 mm cannulated screws (CANN), the femoral neck system (FNS) (Depuy Synthes), and the dynamic hip screw (DHS) (Depuy Synthes). Materials and Methods: Five osteoporotic Sawbone femurs were used for each model and a control group. Two scenarios were investigated: single leg stance to measure construct stiffness and lateral impact to measure construct stiffness, energy to fracture, and qualitative examination of fracture patterns. Stiffness for each femur and energy to fracture for the lateral impact scenario were calculated and compared between groups using one-way ANOVA. Results: DHS showed significantly higher stiffness than the other 2 implants and the control in single leg stance. In the lateral impact scenario, the DHS and CANN were significantly stiffer FNS and the control. Femurs implanted with CANN tended to fracture at the greater trochanter while FNS fractured in a transverse subtrochanteric pattern, and DHS fractured obliquely in the subtrochanteric region. Discussion: FNS and DHS experienced fracture patterns less amenable to surgical correction. CANN and DHS proved better able to resist external forces in the lateral fall scenario. CANN also proved better able to resist external forces in the single leg stance scenario and experienced a more amenable fracture pattern in the lateral fall scenario. Conclusions: FNS was less able to resist external forces compared with the other implants. This work informs the potential implications between the choice of implants that, although historically have not been used prophylactically, may be considered in the future for prophylactic stabilization of the femoral neck. Cadaveric study and clinical trials are recommended for further study.

Indexed as

cannulated screwdynamic hip screwfemoral neckfemoral neck systemosteoporosis

Identifiers

PMID36533207
PMCPMC9747871
OpenAlexW4312067158

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.