SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Comparison of integrated dual-lag screw versus single lag screw cephalomedullary nails for intertrochanteric femoral fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2026. 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
backgroundTo determine whether an integrated dual-lag-screw (IDLS) cephalomedullary nail (CMN) confers superior clinical and mechanical outcomes compared with single-lag-screw (SLS) designs in the fixation of intertrochanteric femoral fractures.
methodsSeven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from inception through 20 January 2025 following PRISMA guidelines. Randomized trials and comparative observational studies of adult intertrochanteric or subtrochanteric extension fractures treated with IDLS versus SLS nailing and ≥ 6 months follow-up were eligible. Twenty-nine studies met all criteria. Three reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and graded quality (ROB-2 for randomized controlled trials, MINORS for non-randomized studies). Random-effects meta-analysis produced pooled odds ratios (OR) for binary outcomes; heterogeneity was assessed with I². Publication bias was explored with funnel plots, trim-and-fill, and Egger's test.
resultsThe 29 studies encompassed over 20,000 fractures. Compared with SLS nails, IDLS fixation was associated with significantly fewer implant-related complications (OR 0.55, P = .01), instances of lag-screw cut-out (OR 0.44, P = .016), and cases of lateral hip or thigh pain (OR 0.50, P < .01). In the unstable-fracture subgroup, IDLS nails similarly showed lower odds of implant-related complications (OR 0.38, P < .001), revision surgeries (OR 0.37, P = .005), mechanical failure (OR = 0.19, P < .001), cut-out (OR = 0.19, P < .001) and post-operative hip/thigh pain (OR = 0.47, P < .006) compared to SLS nails. No significant evidence of publication bias was detected. Operative time, blood loss, union rate, and 1-year Harris Hip Score were comparable between constructs.
conclusionsIDLS CMNs demonstrated markedly lower rates of mechanical failure, revision surgery, and lateral hip/thigh pain, especially in unstable intertrochanteric fracture patterns. These findings support preferential use of IDLS implants in geriatric fragility hip fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV Therapeutic.
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.