ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2024
Femoral neck fracture fixation in rhombic versus inverted triangle configuration in young adults: A systematic review.
Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This review evaluated the outcomes of rhombic versus inverted triangle configuration fixation of femoral neck fractures. Methods: Six databases, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), were comprehensibly searched for the comparative studies of two configurations (rhombic versus inverted triangle) of neck femur fracture fixation. Ultimately seven studies were included in this systematic review for qualitative and quantitative analysis. A meta-analysis was performed with the software RevMan 5.4.1. Results: Fewer nonunion (OR 0.46 with 95 % CI 0.23, 0.94; p = 0.03), and early full weight bearing (MD -3.09 with 95 % CI -5.41, -0.77; p = 0.009) were seen in the rhombic than in the inverted configuration; however, a better hip function (MD 3.72 with 95 % CI 0.99, 6.44; p = 0.008), and lesser less blood loss (MD 3.84 with 95 % CI 1.19, 6.49; p = 0.004) during surgery were found in the inverted triangle configuration. There was no difference between the two fixation configurations regarding the duration of surgery, fracture union time, overall complications, femoral neck shortening, length of hospital stay, fluoroscopy times, and incision size. Conclusion: The rhomboid configuration showed fewer non-union, early weight bearing, better hip function and comparable complications rate than the inverted triangle configuration; however, there was more blood loss intraoperatively than inverted triangle configuration. Hence, the addition of a fourth screw in the rhombic configuration have an added advantage over the inverted triangle configuration in femoral neck fracture.
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.