ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2024
Management of Distal Femoral Non-union: A Systematic Review.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antibiofilm-coated intramedullary nailing for tibial and femoral diaphyseal fractures at high-risk infection: outcomes of 103 consecutive patients.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026Observational
- Delivering orthopaedics in Burundi: a model for humanitarian surgery in resource-limited settings.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
- Association of albumin, ASA class, and time with mortality, Re-admission, and Re-operation after proximal femoral fracture fixation.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2026Article
- Beyond the plate: is there a radiological advantage to cortical strut allografts in periprosthetic femoral fractures?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Opportunities Offered by Telemedicine in the Care of Patients Affected by Fractures and Critical Issues: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Application of the LEG NUI score to assess revision success in established distal femur non-unions.Journal of orthopaedics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Managing distal femur fracture nonunion is complex, with unpredictable results. The present investigation systematically updates current evidence, reviews existing modalities, innovations and related outcomes, and discusses future perspectives on the management of nonunion of the distal femur. Methods: This study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the 2020 PRISMA statement. In April 2024, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase were accessed without time constraints. No additional filters were used in the database search. All the clinical studies investigating treatment options for nonunion of distal femur fractures were accessed. Results: 35 clinical studies (832 patients) were included. Of them, 34.2% (239 of 698 patients) reported an open fracture, and 24.5% (78 of 319 patients) reported infection at the fracture site. The mean length of the follow-up was 28.9 ± 13.2 months. The mean age of the patients was 53.8 ± 14.7 years. Conclusion: 84.5% (703 of 832) of patients reached complete union without major complications, and 3.8% (32 of 832) reached complete union with major complications at a mean of 21.7 ± 20.9 months. 8.7% (72 of 832) patients showed signs of persistent non-union. Level of evidence: Level III, systematic review. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-024-01205-4.
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.