ArticleHip & pelvis2023
Cut-Through versus Cut-Out: No Easy Way to Predict How Single Lag Screw Design Cephalomedullary Nails Used for Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures Will Fail?
Article in Hip & pelvis, 2023. 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.
- Comparison of mechanical and clinical outcomes between cement-augmented and conventional cephalomedullary nailing in osteoporotic trochanteric fractures: a propensity score-matched cohort study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- High Fixation Failure Rate of Cephalomedullary Nail Fixation in Patients with Low-Energy Basicervical Femoral Fractures: Do We Need Extramedullary Reduction?Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Application of deep learning algorithms in classification and localization of implant cutout for the postoperative hip.Skeletal radiology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aims to compare patients in whom fixation failure occurred via cut-out (CO) or cut-through (CT) in order to determine patient factors and radiographic parameters that may be predictive of each mechanism. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study includes 18 patients with intertrochanteric (IT) hip fractures (AO/OTA classification 31A1.3) who underwent treatment using a single lag screw design intramedullary nail in whom fixation failure occurred within one year. All patients were reviewed for demographics and radiographic parameters including tip-to-apex distance (TAD), posteromedial calcar continuity, neck-shaft angle, lateral wall thickness, and others. Patients were grouped into cohorts based on the mechanism of failure, either lag screw CO or CT, and a comparison was performed. Results: No differences in demographics, injury details, fracture classifications, or radiographic parameters were observed between CO/CT cohorts. Of note, a similar rate of post-reduction TAD>25 mm ( Conclusion: The mechanism of CT failure during intramedullary nail fixation of an IT fracture did not show an association with clinical data including patient demographics, reduction accuracy, or radiographic parameters. As reported in previous biomechanical studies, the main predictive factor for patients in whom early failure might occur via the CT effect mechanism may be related to bone quality; however, conduct of larger studies will be required in order to determine whether there is a difference in bone quality.
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.