ArticleCureus2025
Comparison of Functional and Radiological Outcomes of Intramedullary Nailing of the Tibia Using Suprapatellar and Infrapatellar Approaches.
Article in Cureus, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTibial shaft fractures are among the most common long bone injuries, frequently resulting from road traffic accidents, falls, and sports injuries. Intramedullary nailing (IMN) has become the gold standard for managing these fractures, but debate persists regarding the optimal surgical approach: suprapatellar (SPN) or infrapatellar (IFN).
methodsThis prospective observational study was conducted at Mahatma Gandhi Memorial (MGM) Medical College and Maharaja Yeshwantrao (MY) Hospital, Indore, between October 2023 and September 2024. Sixty patients with closed or grade 1 compound tibial shaft fractures were enrolled and randomized equally into SPN and IFN groups. Surgical time, postoperative pain (visual analog scale scores), functional outcomes (Lysholm Knee Score), radiological alignment, and complications were assessed at two weeks, six weeks, and three months postoperatively.
resultsThe study population showed male predominance (88.33%), with a mean age of 32.1 years (SPN) and 36.2 years (IFN). Road traffic accidents were the leading cause of injury. The SPN group had significantly longer surgical times (77.63 ± 8.50 minutes) compared to the IFN group (68.80 ± 4.43 minutes; p = 0.00000836), though a learning curve was noted. Postoperative pain and functional recovery were similar in both groups across all follow-ups. By three months, the majority of patients in both groups achieved excellent functional outcomes, and radiological alignment was comparable. Minimal complications were observed, with only one case of knee stiffness in the SPN group, successfully managed.
conclusionBoth SPN and IFN approaches for tibial IMN offer comparable functional and radiological outcomes at three months. Although the SPN approach had a longer operative time initially, it did not significantly affect postoperative pain, fracture healing, or complication rates. Choice of approach may therefore be tailored based on surgeon preference, fracture location, and patient-specific considerations.
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.