ArticleBone & joint research2025
Decreased femoral fracture load after cephalomedullary nail removal : a biomechanical ex vivo study.
Article in Bone & joint research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transient acute kidney injury following femoral fracture in mice : the role of sympathetic activation.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Comparisons of phantom-based and phantomless QCT bone mineral density for predicting subsequent fractures.Bone & joint research · 2026Article
- Re‑fracture risk following implant removal in consolidated hip fractures: a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 575 patients.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Considerations for removal of cephalomedullary screws and blades following intertrochanteric femoral fracture healing: a narrative review.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
- Femoral strength after cephalomedullary nail removal can be predicted preoperatively using CT based FE models.Scientific reports · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aims: Spontaneous neck fractures are feared complications of cephalomedullary nail removal after successful healing of per- and subtrochanteric fractures. To date, the initial postoperative stability as well as the correct weightbearing regimen remain unclear. The aim of this biomechanical ex vivo study was to evaluate the initial postoperative failure load after hardware removal of specimens, which received cephalomedullary nails during their lifetime. Methods: A total of 20 specimens of voluntary body donors were included in this study. Group 1 (n = 10) consisted of specimens that received cephalomedullary nails during their lifetime due to per- or subtrochanteric fractures. Each individual was matched for age, sex, femur size, and neck-shaft angle (Group 2 = control, n = 10). Biomechanical testing was performed in a single-leg stance setting, and volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) was measured proximally at the femoral neck and distally at the epicondyles. Results: Groups 1 and 2 differed significantly in terms of failure loads (p = 0.002), fracture types, and ratios of proximal and distal vBMD (p = 0.035). Femora after nail removal were significantly weaker (1,835.0 N vs 4,523.0 N) and showed lower ratios of proximal to distal vBMD (0.74 vs 1.18), which indicated altered stress distributions at the femoral neck in presence of femoral neck screws. They were further characterized by predominantly subcapital buckle-type fractures, while the control Group 2 showed predominantly transcervical fractures. Conclusion: Altered stress distribution in presence of femoral neck screws leads to changes in biomechanical properties of the proximal femur, resulting in potentially unstable situations after nail removal in clinical settings. Elective removal of cephalomedullary nails should be undertaken with caution in view of the potentially increased fracture risk.
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.