SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Comparison of suprapatellar and infrapatellar intramedullary nailing for tibial fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntermedullary nailing (IMN) is the gold standard for the surgical treatment of extra-articular tibial fractures. The suprapatellar (SP) nailing approach offers several advantages over the conventional infrapatellar (IP) approach. However, most existing evidence is derived from retrospective observational studies. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy of the SP and IP approaches in extra-articular tibial fracture management.
methodsRCTs were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar through December 31, 2024. Perioperative outcomes, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, knee function metrics, and postoperative complications were compared using weighted mean difference (WMD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
resultsRCTs were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, RCTs were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, SP approach was associated with significantly shorter operative time (WMD=-13.19 min, 95%CI: -24.37 to -2.02, p=0.021) and fluoroscopy time (WMD=-20.23, 95%CI:-39.74 to -0.71, p=0.042). Additionally, the SP approach resulted in lower VAS pain score (WMD=-1.10, 95%CI: -1.90 to -0.31, p=0.007) and improved Lysholm knee score (WMD=4.22, 95%CI: 2.34 to 6.10, p<0.001) and KUJALA score (WMD=12.95, 95%CI: 10.78 to 15.13, p<0.001). No significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, range of motion, union time, or complication rates (delayed union, nonunion, infection, secondary operation).
conclusionsThe SP nailing approach is a safe and effective alternative to the traditional IP approach and may be recommended for the surgical treatment of extra-articular tibial 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.