Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39149078›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

Comparison of three different internal fixation methods in the treatment of femoral neck fracture.

Xinzhao Zhang, Changling Zheng, Jin Huang, Hui Chen, Jie Lei, Cong Huang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. [Research progress in treatment of Garden typeZhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Xinzhao ZhangDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.
Changling ZhengDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.
Jin HuangDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.
Hui ChenDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.
Jie LeiDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.
Cong HuangDepartment of Orthopedics, Ningde Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital Affiliated to Fujian University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Fujian, Ningde, 352100, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of three different fixation methods in treating femoral neck fractures in young patients. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 35 young patients with femoral neck fractures who underwent surgical treatment. Among them, 16, 12, and 7 patients underwent fixation with three cannulated compression screws (3CS), the femoral neck system (FNS), and the compound compression system (CCS), respectively. Data, including fracture classification, injury-to-surgery time, surgery duration, intraoperative blood loss, fluoroscopy instances, fracture healing time, complications, and Harris score at the final follow-up, were collected and analyzed to compare clinical outcomes among the three fixation methods. Results: All patients were followed for at least 6 months, exhibiting no significant differences in age, gender, injury side, fracture type, or injury-to-operation time among the three groups (P > 0.05). The FNS and CCS groups exhibited shorter operation durations and fewer intraoperative fluoroscopy instances compared to the 3CS group (P < 0.01). Despite the minimally invasive nature of 3CS, the FNS and CCS groups experienced higher intraoperative blood loss (P < 0.01). During follow-up, only one patient with 3CS fixation developed nonunion. Additionally, patients treated with 3CS demonstrated a higher incidence of femoral head necrosis and severe femoral neck shortening than the FNS and CCS groups. Excluding patients with combined nonunion, no significant difference in mean fracture healing time was observed among the three groups (P > 0.05). At the last follow-up, the FNS and CCS groups showed higher Harris scores (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Both FNS and CCS are effective internal fixation systems for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in young patients, yielding more satisfactory clinical functional outcomes than 3CS. Comparatively, the CCS system presents a higher risk of iatrogenic rotation of the proximal fracture segment. Therefore, we advocate the insertion of two to three 2.5 mm Kirschner wires from the upper edge of the femoral neck along the axial direction before CCS lag screw insertion to resist iatrogenic rotational stress.

Indexed as

Cannulated compression screwCompound compression systemFemoral neck fractureFemoral neck system

Identifiers

PMID39149078
PMCPMC11325052

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.