ReviewJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Positive buttress reduction in femoral neck fractures: a literature review.
Review in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2024. 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.
- [Positive cortical support reduction in treatment of trochanteric femur fractures: history in theory establishment and its inspiration for clinical innovations].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Review
- Analysis of Animal Models of Traumatic Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head Based on Blood Supply: A Literature Review.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Review
- Optimal sliding distance in femoral neck system for displaced femoral neck fractures: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFemoral neck fractures (FNFs) in young adults are usually caused by high-energy trauma, and their treatment remains a challenging issue for orthopedic surgeons. The quality of reduction is considered an important factor in improving the poor prognosis of patients with FNFs. In recent years, positive buttress closed reduction technique has received widespread attention in the treatment of FNFs. This comprehensive literature review is designed to encapsulate the impacts of both non-anatomic and anatomic reduction on the biomechanical stability, clinical outcomes, and postoperative complications in the management of FNFs, conjecture the efficacy of positively braced reduction techniques and provide a thorough summarization of the clinical outcomes.
methodsIn this literature review, we have examined all clinical and biomechanical studies related to the treatment of FNFs using non-anatomical reduction or positive and negative buttress reduction. PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Embase Library databases were searched systematically for studies published before September 1, 2023. Published literature on fracture reduction techniques for treating FNFs was reviewed. In addition, we evaluated the included literature using the MINORs tool.
resultsAlthough the "arch bridge" structure formed by the positive buttress reduction technique improved the support to the cortical bone and provided a more stable biomechanical structure, no significant differences were noted in the clinical efficacy and incidence of postoperative complications between the positive buttress reduction and anatomical reduction.
conclusionPositive buttress reduction is an effective treatment method for young patients with FNFs. When facing difficult-to-reduce FNF, positive buttress reduction should be considered first, followed by anatomical reduction. However, negative buttress reduction should be avoided.
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.