SynthesisChinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi2025
Flexible intramedullary nails for the treatment of metacarpal fractures: A systematic review.
Synthesis in Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Surgically treated metacarpal fractures in adults: a study with 3286 cases based on the Swedish National Quality Registry for Hand Surgery.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
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
purposeFlexible intramedullary nails (FIN) enable minimally invasive and immediate fracture stabilisation, while facilitating early active movement in metacarpal fractures. This systematic review aims to compare locked, non-locked, single, and double FIN and their post-operative outcomes in metacarpal fractures.
methodsA primary literature search was performed on July 15, 2024. English-language studies investigating acute metacarpal fractures, treated with FIN were included. Analyses included: the 5th metacarpal neck fractures locked vs. non-locked FIN; 5th metacarpal neck fractures non-locked single vs. dual FIN; and the 2nd-5th metacarpal fractures locked vs. non-locked FIN. The National Institute for Health tool and the JBI tool were used to assess study quality for controlled trials and case series, respectively.
resultsThirteen studies (n=649 fractures) were eligible, with 12 low risks of bias. There was no difference in overall complication rates between locked and non-locked, and single and double non-locked FIN. Non-locked FIN demonstrated reduced metacarpophalangeal joint penetration (odds ratio (OR): 3.30 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.23-8.80; p=0.017 and delayed union (OR: 6.95; 95% CI: 1.86-25.97; p=0.004), but increased tendon irritation (OR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05-0.83; p=0.027 vs. locked FIN. Overall operative times were lower for single vs. double non-locked nails (mean difference: 9.17; 95% CI: 6.12-12.22; p<0.001).
conclusionsThese findings demonstrate low complication rates and excellent functional results using FIN to fix displaced metacarpal fractures. Although complication profiles are contrasting, there is no clear benefit in using locked or double nails compared to a single non-locked FIN.
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.