ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2026
Optimizing fixation in medial distal femur fractures: A biomechanical study.
Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to biomechanically compare four fixation methods to identify the most stable construct under axial loading conditions. MATERIAL AND
methodsA standardized osteotomy model simulating AO/OTA 33-B2.1 fractures was created in 28 synthetic femurs. Four groups (n = 7 each) were tested: (1) three 6.5-mm cannulated screws, (2) the same with an additional centrally placed screw, (3) three screws plus a 3.5-mm buttress plate, and (4) three screws combined with a reversed anatomical proximal tibial locking plate. Constructs were subjected to cyclic and static axial loading. The prespecified primary endpoint was load at 2-mm displacement, with stiffness and maximum load to failure as secondary outcomes.
resultsGroup 4 exhibited the highest stiffness (802 ± 70 N/mm), maximum load (2360 ± 389 N), and resistance to 2-mm displacement (1138 ± 87 N). Group 2, with a centrally placed fourth screw, showed significantly improved performance in terms of maximum load compared to the traditional three-screw construct. While Group 3 improved stiffness over screw-only constructs, it did not significantly outperform Group 2 in key load metrics. Group 2, with a centrally placed fourth screw, demonstrated comparable stability to the buttress plate and anatomical locking plate in selected metrics, but remained inferior to the locking plate construct.
conclusionCentral placement of cannulated screws to the medial femoral condyle enhanced axial stability in this synthetic model and represented a minimally invasive alternative to buttress plating in selected metrics. The highest stability was achieved with the combined use of cannulated screws and a locking plate. These results are restricted to axial loading and the tested endpoints; thus, further biomechanical, cadaveric, and clinical studies are warranted before generalizing to early weight-bearing. Given the anatomical challenges of the medial condyle, the development of anatomically contoured locking plates specifically designed for this region remains an important future direction.
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.