ArticleTrauma case reports2026
Trifocal femur fracture: Where should one begin? A case report and literature review.
Article in Trauma case reports, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Ipsilateral, non-contiguous femoral fractures involving the femoral neck, shaft, and distal articular region are extremely rare and typically result from high-energy trauma. Their complex nature and rarity contribute to a lack of consensus regarding optimal surgical management. Case report: We report the case of a 72-year-old male involved in a high-energy motor vehicle accident who sustained a trifocal femoral fracture: an intracapsular femoral neck fracture (AO/OTA 31-B2, Pauwels type 3), a displaced diaphyseal fracture (AO/OTA 32-A2), and a complete intra-articular distal femoral fracture (AO/OTA 33-C2). Initial management included transtibial traction under a Damage Control Orthopaedics (DCO) protocol, followed by definitive fixation 10 days later using a single-stage stepwise surgical approach. Fixation consisted of an antegrade intramedullary nail (providing stabilization of the femoral neck and shaft fractures), 6.5-mm cannulated screws used exclusively for the intra-articular distal femoral fracture, and a LISS plate for the distal metaphyseal component. Results: Postoperative recovery was uneventful, with radiographic evidence of full fracture union and no signs of post-traumatic osteoarthritis at final follow-up. Clinical recovery was excellent. Discussion: This is one of the few reported cases in the literature involving a trifocal femoral fracture with this specific combination. Our surgical strategy allowed absolute stability of the distal articular fracture and relative stability for the shaft and femoral neck. A qualitative literature review revealed no standardized algorithm for implant selection or fixation sequence in such cases. Our experience supports a tailored approach based on fracture pattern, emphasizing the preservation of femoral head vascularity and anatomical reduction of joint surfaces. Conclusion: Trifocal ipsilateral femoral fractures require individualized surgical planning. The described combination of implants-used here for the first time-proved effective and may serve as a reference in similar complex trauma cases.
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.