ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Biomechanical investigation of positive reduction in the femoral neck fracture: a finite element analysis.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in internal fixation methods for intertrochanteric femoral fractures: A narrative review.Pakistan journal of medical sciences · 2026Review
- 320 mm InterTan nail optimizes biomechanics in AO/OTA 31A2.3 fractures: superior stress distribution, micromotion, and strain for enhanced healing.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Hip arthroscope-assisted percutaneous reduction and fixation of displaced subcapital femoral neck fracture.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Biomechanical study of different internal fixation devices for femoral neck fractures: finite element analysis based on different reduction qualities.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Gotfried positive reduction offers an alternative strategy for femoral neck fracture (FNF) when achieving anatomical reduction is challenging. However, the biomechanical consequences of positive reduction remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the biomechanical behavior of positive reduction across different Pauwels classification, providing a reference for quantifying positive reduction in clinical practice. Methods: Three-dimensional (3D) models of FNF were established and categorized according to the Pauwels classifications (Pauwels I, II, and III), each of them contained seven models with different reduction qualities, including an anatomical reduction model, two negative reduction models, and four positive reduction models, all of which were stabilized with dynamic hip screws (DHS) and cannulated screws (CS). We investigated the maximal von-Mises stress of internal fixation and proximal femoral, femoral fragment displacement, and maximal von-Mises strain at the proximal fragment fracture site when a 2100 N load was applied to the femoral head. Results: The maximum von-Mises stress on the internal fixators in each Pauwels group was lowest in the anatomical reduction model. In the Pauwels I group, positive reduction exceeding 3 mm resulted in the maximum von-Mises stress on the internal fixators surpassing that of the negative reduction model. For the Pauwels II group, positive reduction beyond 2 mm led to the maximum von-Mises stress on the internal fixators exceeding that of the negative reduction model. In the Pauwels III group, positive reduction beyond 1 mm caused the maximum von-Mises stress on the internal fixators to be higher than that of the negative reduction model. The maximum von-Mises strain at the fracture site of proximal femur fragment increased with positive reduction. Varus displacement increased in positive reduction models as the Pauwels angle rose, potentially exacerbating rotation deformity in Pauwels III group. Conclusion: Excessive positive reduction may increase the risk of FNF failure after internal fixation. From a biomechanical stability perspective, positive reduction should be limited to 3 mm or below in the Pauwels I group, restricted to not exceed 2 mm in the Pauwels II group, and should not exceed 1 mm in the Pauwels III group. Negative reduction should be avoided in all Pauwels groups.
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.