ArticleBMC surgery2025
Comparative analysis of the parapatellar and subpatellar approaches in reducing peripheral knee pain post-intramedullary tibial fracture surgery.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Comparison of effectiveness between infrapatellar and semi-extended parapatellar approaches for intramedullary nailing in treatment of type A tibial shaft fractures].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026Article
- 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 tibial nailing is a standard treatment for tibial shaft fractures. Postoperative knee pain significantly impacts functional recovery; however, studies on this issue are limited. This study evaluated the effect of the parapatellar approach for intramedullary nailing on postoperative knee pain. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 29 patients with tibial shaft fractures treated with intramedullary nails from March 2019 to January 2022 were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach: the semi-extended lateral parapatellar approach and the conventional subpatellar ligament split approach. Recorded metrics included operation time, intraoperative fluoroscopy count, intraoperative bleeding volume, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores for knee pain at 24 h, 72 h, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively, fracture healing time and Lysholm knee functional scores at 12 months.
resultsBoth groups completed the operation without significant differences in operation time, intraoperative bleeding, fracture healing time, or intraoperative fluoroscopy (P > 0.05). The parapatellar group showed significantly better VAS scores for knee pain at 24 h, 72 h, and 1 week postoperatively compared to the control group (P < 0.05), with no significant difference at 1 month. After 12 months, Lysholm scores indicated no significant differences in knee support, locking, and swelling (P > 0.05); however, the parapatellar group showed significant improvements in lameness, instability, stair climbing, squatting, and pain (P < 0.05). Overall, the parapatellar group outperformed the control group (P = 0.01). Additionally, long-term follow-up revealed potential advantages of the parapatellar approach in improving long-term functional outcomes.
conclusionsUsing the parapatellar approach for tibial intramedullary nailing avoids splitting the patellar ligament and entering the joint cavity, minimizing knee joint impact and effectively reducing postoperative knee pain, with potential benefits in long-term functional recovery.
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.