ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2024
Comparison of dynamic compression system versus multiple cancellous screws in the treatment of femoral neck fractures in young adults.
Article 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. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionFemoral neck fractures have posed a significant global healthcare challenge and had notable impacts on the quality of life. Current treatment strategies for femoral neck fractures in young individuals have varied, emphasizing the need for optimal fixation methods. This study compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of the dynamic compression system (DCS) and multiple cancellous screws (MCS) methods.
methodsThis retrospective study included a total of 275 young adults with fresh femoral neck fractures treated with DCS and MCS. A matching analysis with a 1:1 ratio based on age, gender, fracture classification, and reduction quality was conducted. Demographic data were recorded, and comparisons were made according to follow-up time (FUT), hospitalization period, operation duration, femoral neck shortening, caput-collum-diaphysis (CCD) angle, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and post-operative complications.
resultsA total of 42 fractures were matched with a median age of 42 years (range, 22-48). In the DCS group, vertical neck shortening (median 1.92) was significantly lower than that in the MCS group (median 4.53) (P < 0.05). In the DCS group, horizontal femoral neck shortening, resultant femoral neck shortening, the amount of change in CCD angle, and HHS were 0.57 mm (0.43, 4.74 mm), 1.82 mm (0.40, 3.53 mm), 0.13° (-0.78°, 1.80°), and 91 (85-93), respectively. They were all non-significant than 1.00 mm (0.56, 6.23 mm), 2.74 mm (1.59, 6.71 mm), -0.18° (-1.11°,1.85°), and 91 (75, 93) in the MCS group, respectively (P > 0.05). There was no statistical difference in FUT, hospitalization period, operation time, and post-operative complications at the latest follow-up (P > 0.05). There were no complications such as pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, and incision infection reported.
conclusionDCS and MCS demonstrated effectiveness in treating femoral neck fractures in young adults. The DCS implant provides additional stability in the vertical axis. A prospective randomized controlled study with a large sample size was needed to validate these findings.
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.