ArticleCureus2023
A Comparison of the Outcomes Between Suprapatellar and Infrapatellar Approaches of Intramedullary Interlock Nailing in Patients With Extra-Articular Tibial Fractures.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of suprapatellar and infrapatellar intramedullary nailing for tibial fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Efficacy comparison between intramedullary nail fixation and plate fixation in distal tibia fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Pooled it
- Assessment of functional and radiological outcomes of suprapatellar and infrapatellar approaches of tibial nailing in patients with tibial shaft fracture: A randomized control study.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objective Intramedullary nailing can be considered the current gold standard for the treatment of diaphyseal tibial fractures. Nailing ensures good fracture stability, protection against malalignment, and quick mobilization. The suprapatellar (SP) approach of tibial nailing in the semi-extended position has recently been recommended as a safe and effective surgical technique; it has been gaining significant attention in the orthopedic literature, with fewer complications and reoperations. The approach has been shown to facilitate a reduction in fractures around the knee joint in the semi-extended position, and the extended position of the lower leg allows for easier fluoroscopic imaging. In this study, we aimed to compare the outcomes between SP and infrapatellar (IP) approaches of intramedullary nailing in patients with extra-articular tibial fractures. Method A randomized control trial was conducted over a period of 1.5 years at our tertiary care hospital after obtaining approval from its institutional ethics committee. A total of 60 patients with extra-articular tibial fractures were included in the study, with 30 patients each in the SP nailing group and the IP nailing group, based on randomized sampling and with the help of radiological exposure in SP and IP nailing as per a previous study. The groups were then compared in terms of KUJALA patellofemoral knee score, operative time, radiation exposure, and time of union. Results When comparing both groups, those treated with the SP approach had better outcomes, including reduced radiation exposure, less pain, decreased operative time, better KUJALA patellofemoral knee score, and faster union. Conclusion Based on our findings of the comparison between SP and IP nailing approaches of extra-articular tibial fractures, the former leads to better and safer outcomes than the latter.
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.