ArticleUnfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2024
[Nonunions after intertrochanteric and subtrochanteric femoral fractures].
Article in Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Non-Unions of the lower extremities].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- [Osteosynthesis of subtrochanteric femoral fractures in adults].Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe overall frequency of proximal femoral fractures means that we are repeatedly confronted with failed healing and implant failure, despite a relatively low nonunion rate especially in intertrochanteric fractures (< 5%). The aim of this paper is to present our approach to treating these nonunions of the proximal femur and discuss the treatment results. MATERIAL AND
methodsBetween 2009 and 2023, patients with nonunion of the proximal femur were retrospectively identified and analyzed. Age, gender, time to revision, the Weber-Cech classification of pseudarthrosis and radiographic imaging before and after revision were analyzed.
resultsA total of 66 patients were analyzed. The mean age was 58 years (range 25-88 years). The overall healing rate was 88% with a mean consolidation time of 8 months (range 2-29 months). The main osteosynthesis procedures were plate osteosynthesis (n = 45, of which 44 were blade plates), and nail replacement (n = 12). Other procedures included augmentative plate osteosyntheses (n = 4), isolated cancellous bone graft (n = 2), nail dynamization (n = 2), and the use of a dynamic hip screw (n = 1). DISCUSSION: The analysis of our treatment data as well as the current literature, revealed a trend towards intramedullary revision procedures. Implants that can be used to correct the CCD angle, such as the blade plate, remain a predictable option to achieve correction, especially in nonunions with an increased degree of varus. Particularly in the subtrochanteric region, fractures can also be treated in a targeted manner by a combination of mechanical and biological methods with a reamed nail change to a larger caliber implant.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38224360What 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.