ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparison of combined femoral nail and plate fixation versus dual plate fixation in the treatment of AO/OTA 33C distal femoral fractures.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Biomechanical advantages of double-column bridging plate-augmented PFNA for complex subtrochanteric femoral fractures: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Does dual-plating offer superior stability in complex distal femoral fracture management?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of retrograde intramedullary nailing combined with a lateral locking plate versus dual plating (medial and lateral locking plates) in the treatment of AO/OTA 33C distal femoral fractures. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 78 patients treated between June 2017 and December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: the nail-plate group (n = 42) and the dual-plate group (n = 36). Outcome measures included intraoperative blood loss, operative time, time to weight-bearing, bone union time, visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, hospital for special surgery (HSS) scores at final follow-up, knee range of motion (ROM), and complication rates. No significant differences were observed between the groups in terms of blood loss, operative time, time to weight-bearing, bone healing time, or follow-up duration (P > 0.05). Final follow-up assessments revealed no significant differences in VAS scores, HSS scores, or knee ROM (P > 0.05). The nail-plate group experienced five complications: one delayed union, two infections, one case of knee stiffness, and one case of limb shortening. The dual-plate group reported six complications: one delayed union, one nonunion, one infection, one case of knee stiffness, one malalignment, and one case of limb shortening. Complication rates did not differ significantly between groups (P > 0.05). No implant failures were observed in either group. Both fixation strategies provided stable constructs, facilitated early recovery, and resulted in satisfactory functional outcomes. Retrograde intramedullary nailing with lateral plating and dual plating are both effective options for the management of complex AO/OTA 33 C distal femoral fractures.
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.