ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Quantitative biomechanical analysis of fracture patterns in ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: an in-silico study.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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.
- Four different fixation strategies for ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures: a finite element analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Finite element analysis of four different fixation methods for the treatment of ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ipsilateral femoral neck and shaft fractures (IFN-SFs) caused by high-energy trauma pose a significant risk of complications related to bone healing. Prompt identification of fracture types and maintenance of fracture fixation stability can mitigate this risk. This study employed finite element analysis to evaluate biomechanical parameters for the stability of fixation in IFN-SFs and quantify differences in biomechanical stability among various fracture types. Methods: Patient-specific femur models were constructed from computed tomography data of 10 individuals. Simulating combinations of three Pauwels classifications (I-III) of femoral neck fractures (FNFs) and three femoral shaft fracture (FSF) types (transverse, wedge-shaped, comminuted), a total of 90 FNF-FSF models were generated. Reconstruction nails with cannulated screws were used to fix the fracture models, and postoperative single-leg standing loads were simulated. The entropy method comprehensively evaluated biomechanical parameters to assess the fixation stability for different fracture types. Results: Among fracture types, Pauwels Type III FNF combined with comminuted FSF showed the lowest stability (composite score = 0.22), while Pauwels Type I FNF with transverse FSF was the most stable (composite score = 0.79). Maximum implant stress (weight = 24.5%) and maximum proximal-distal femur interfragmentary motion (weight = 17.1%) were the most influential biomechanical parameters for assessing IFN-SF stability. Conclusion: For IFN-SFs, the FNF type primarily dictates fixation stability, with the FSF contributing synergistically. Maximum implant stress and proximal-distal femur interfragmentary motion are key biomechanical indicators for assessing IFN-SFs. Personalized enhanced fixation strategies are essential for ipsilateral Pauwels Type III FNF and comminuted FSF.
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.