ArticleScientific reports2024
Optimized reamer geometry for controlled reaming of the proximal femur.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Preparation of the femoral proximal medullary cavity by reaming is essential for intramedullary nail osteosynthesis and hip revision arthroplasty. The use of reamers sometimes exerts high torsional forces on the bone. Design and direction of rotation of the reamer are potential influencing factors. The aim of this biomechanical study is to evaluate the best combination of a right- or left-cutting reamer with a clockwise- or counterclockwise-rotating insert in terms of preparation and safety. Right- and left-cutting reamers with conical design were each introduced into five synthetic femurs in both clockwise and counterclockwise rotation with constant feed force. A specially constructed test system was used for this series of tests, with which the respective intramedullary channel were reamed step by step. This was then used to determine the required torque. In addition, the feed rate measurement was analyzed using a modified digital caliper. The feed rates of the reamers with rotation in the same direction as the cutting direction were significantly increased compared to rotation in the opposite cutting direction (CCRLC vs. CCRRC 76.8 ± 9.0 mm/s vs. 25.2 ± 8.3 mm/s and CRRC vs. CRLC 54.3 ± 12.3 mm/s vs. 19.3 ± 0.6 mm/s; p < 0.01). In contrast, the mean torque during the reaming process was identical in all four groups. When preparing the proximal femoral medullary cavity, especially in cases with fragile bone structure, the available reamers should be introduced in opposite rotation to the cutting direction to achieve a more controllable feed of the reamer. Left-cutting reamers represent an alternative, using them in the usual clockwise-rotating technique to reduce the risk of complications during reaming.
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.