ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2025
Morphometric, morphologic and topographic evaluation of diaphyseal nutrient foramina of the femur.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVascularization of bones is crucial for bone growth and repair. The nutrient artery, passing through the nutrient foramen, is key to bone blood supply, but its impact on fracture healing and complications is not fully understood. The study aims to investigate the morphology and location of the nutrient foramen in the femoral diaphysis and to understand its clinical implications for fractures.
methodsIn this study, 88 adult dry femurs of unknown age and sex were examined. The characteristics of the nutrient foramina, including number, size, direction, and localization were evaluated. The foraminal index [(distance from foramen to proximal end of femur/total length of femur) × 100], was employed to categorize the regions [Region-I, 0-33.33; Region-II, 33.34-66.66; Region-III 66.67-100].
resultsThe majority of the femurs had one or two foramina (92.94%). Of the total number of nutrient foramina, 121 (97.58%) were directed towards the proximal end, while three (2.42%) were horizontal. The majority of foramina were detected in sizes 18G (34.67%) and 20G (27.42%). All nutrient foramina were found on the posterior surface of the femur and adjacent to linea aspera. Sixteen nutrient foramina were located (12.90%) in Region-I, 104 (83.87%) in Region-II, and 4 (3.23%) in Region-III.
conclusionsThe nutrient foramina were typically located in the middle third of femur, adjacent to linea aspera on the posterior surface of femur. This observation indicates that the anterior surface is safer for surgery, while caution is needed near the linea aspera on the posterior surface.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40131503What 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.