ArticleCureus2024
Comparison of Efficacy of Suprapatellar and Infrapatellar Approaches for Intramedullary Interlocking Nailing of Tibia in Patients With Tibial Fracture.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Comparison of suprapatellar and infrapatellar intramedullary nailing for tibial fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- Article
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
introductionIntramedullary interlocking nailing is a common surgical procedure for tibial fractures, enabling early patient mobilization. Traditionally, the infrapatellar approach has been used for intramedullary interlocking nailing of tibial fractures, but the suprapatellar approach is gaining attention for its potential benefits. This randomized controlled study aimed to compare the duration of the surgery, intra-operative blood loss, and fluoroscopy time between the suprapatellar and infrapatellar approaches.
methodsWe included 38 adult patients with tibial shaft fractures, excluding those with non-union, open fractures, revision surgery, or low Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). Patients were divided equally into two groups using block randomization: Group A (19 patients) underwent the infrapatellar approach, and Group B (19 patients) underwent the suprapatellar approach. Blood loss was measured using the gravimetric method and by changes in pre-operative and post-operative hemoglobin levels. Surgical duration by calculating the time elapsed between the start and end of the procedure and fluoroscopy time was logged from the fluoroscopy machine.
resultsIn group A, blood loss averaged 154±30.98 mL, slightly more than in group B (150±32.92 mL), though the difference was not statistically significant (p>0.05). Group A also showed a higher difference in hemoglobin levels (2.20±1.13 g/dL) compared to group B (1.15±0.93 g/dL), which was statistically significant (p=0.02). Fluoroscopy time and duration of the surgery were slightly longer in group A compared to group B but not statistically significant (p=0.693).
conclusionThe suprapatellar approach results in less blood loss, potentially promoting faster recovery, reduced need for blood transfusions, and shorter hospital stays. It also entails shorter fluoroscopy time and surgical duration, though not statistically significant, which may reduce radiation exposure for the surgical team.
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.