Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40057598›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2025

Comparison of elastic stable intramedullary nailing versus retrograde screw fixation for pubic ramus fractures-a biomechanical study.

Julian Scherer, Yasmin Youssef, Toni Wendler, Benjamin Fischer, Stefan Schleifenbaum, Georg Osterhoff

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Julian Scherer *Orthopaedic Research Unit, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Groote Schuur Hospital, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. julian.scherer@usz.ch.
Yasmin Youssef *Department of Orthopaedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Toni WendlerCentre for Research on Musculoskeletal Systems, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.
Benjamin FischerCentre for Research on Musculoskeletal Systems, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.
Stefan SchleifenbaumCentre for Research on Musculoskeletal Systems, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany.
Georg OsterhoffDepartment of Orthopaedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPercutaneous minimally invasive retrograde screw fixation is a widely accepted treatment strategy for patients with superior ramus fractures and has shown good biomechanical stability compared to plating. Recently, elastic stable intramedullary nailing (ESIN) devices have been proposed as an alternative in the treatment of superior ramus fractures. However, biomechanical studies on this new treatment are lacking. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical stability of ESIN in pubic ramus fractures versus retrograde screw fixation.

methodsStandardized pubic ramus fractures (Nakatani type II) were created in fresh-frozen paired hemipelves. Fractures were either stabilized with a 6.5 mm cannulated screw (n = 4) or a 3.5 mm Stainless Steel Elastic Nail System (n = 4). In a validated setup, a cyclic loading protocol was applied with increasing axial force (1500 cycles, 250-750 N). Outcome parameters were fracture mobility over time, fracture displacement and construct survival. Descriptive and opto-metric methods were used to describe the mode of failure.

resultsAmongst all tested hemipelves (n = 8), no construct failure was observed. There was no significant difference in mean vertical fracture displacement between the groups (ESIN 0.07 mm, SD 0.12 versus screw 0.04 mm, SD 0.05; p = 0.773). After 500 cycles at 250 N, mean vertical fracture displacement was 0.09 mm (SD 0.16) in the ESIN group and 0.03 mm (SD 0.04) in the screw group (p = 0.773). After subsequent 500 cycles at 500 N in the vertical plane, mean fracture displacement increased to 0.35 mm (SD 0.31) in the ESIN group and to 0.14 mm (SD 0.17) in the screw group (p = 0.281). With a maximum load of 750 N, after 500 cycles, mean fracture displacement was 0.58 mm (SD 0.51) in the ESIN group and 0.31 mm (SD 0.26) in the screw group (p = 0.376). There was no difference between the implants regarding the accumulated fracture movement over time (ESIN 494 mm*cycles, SD 385 versus screw 220 mm*cycles, SD 210; p = 0.259).

conclusionsIn this in-vitro biomechanical study, fixation of superior ramus fracture using ESIN was not different in construct survival, relative motion to fracture, and fracture displacement when compared to retrograde screw fixation.

Indexed as

Bone NailsBone ScrewsFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryFractures, BonePubic BoneBiomechanical PhenomenaCadaverFemaleHumansMaleBiomechanicalFractureIntramedullary nailPelvisPubic boneScrew fixation

Identifiers

PMID40057598
PMCPMC11890244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.