SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Intramedullary nailing versus plate fixation for the treatment of proximal tibia extra-articular fractures: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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.
- Article
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
purposeThe incidence of proximal tibia extra-articular fractures is fairly common accounting for approximately 5-11% of all tibia fractures (Lang in Clin Orthop Relat Res 315:64-74, 1995; Freedman in Clin Orthop Relat Res 315:25-33, 1995). The optimal treatment method for these fractures between intramedullary nailing and proximal locking plate remains equivocal. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to assess the clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes as well as the complications in adult patients with extra-articular proximal tibia fractures treated with IMN or PLP. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe performed a systematic literature search identifying comparative studies meeting the above criteria and published from January 2000 to May 2024 from four databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library. We performed the meta-analysis in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, and the study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO.
resultsOf the 761 studies identified, nine (9) met our inclusion criteria. Six hundred and sixty-two patients (320 IMN and 342 PLP) were evaluated with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. IMN demonstrated a lower union time [OR = - 2.83, 95% CI: - 4.8-0.87, p = 0.005, I
conclusionIMN demonstrated shorter union time and risk of infection, while LP fixation displayed significantly lower risk for anterior knee pain. Although successful results can be achieved with both implants, further research is required on this topic to provide definitive evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41026262What 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.