ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Comparison of proximal femoral universal nail and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation internal fixation for older patients with intertrochanteric femoral fracture: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Intertrochanteric femoral fractures (IFF) are among the most common lower limb fractures in the older population. Our team has developed a new cephalomedullary nail design called the proximal femoral universal nail (PFUN). This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of PFUN and proximal femoral nail anti-rotation (PFNA) internal fixation for the treatment of IFF in older patients. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 435 older patients with IFF who were treated at Peking University Third Hospital between January 2022 and January 2024. Among them, 215 underwent PFUN (PFUN group) and 220 underwent PFNA (PFNA group) internal fixation. Demographic data, operation time, hospitalization time, blood loss, intraoperative transfusion, complications, Harris hip scores (HHS), and Parker-Palmer mobility scores (PPMS) were compared between the two groups. Results: The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic data ( Conclusion: The PFUN is an effective and safe internal fixation device for IFFs, especially for unstable medial and lateral wall fractures. Compared to PFNA, PFUN can significantly reduce the rate of implant failure in IFFs and accelerate postoperative rehabilitation. For IFFs with AO/OTA classifications of 31-A2 and A3, PFUN has a greater advantage than PFNA.
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.