ArticleMalaysian orthopaedic journal2026
Short versus Long Cephalomedullary Nailing in Osteoporotic Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures.
Article in Malaysian orthopaedic journal, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This study compares the perioperative outcome of short versus long cephalomedullary nailing in the treatment of osteoporotic intertrochanteric femur fracture. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study in which 220 patients were reviewed, with 138 patients treated with long nails and 82 patients with short nails. Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of fracture union rate, mortality rate, or rates of surgical site infection, screw cut-out, implant failure, periprosthetic fracture, and revision surgery. However, patients treated with short cephalomedullary nails had significantly shorter operating times. Conclusion: This study concluded that both the long and short cephalomedullary nails are safe and reliable options in treating intertrochanteric femur fractures. However, the long nail does not provide extra protection against periprosthetic fractures as previously believed, and it has the disadvantage of longer operating time. Therefore, there is no additional clinical benefit in using the long cephalomedullary nail compared to the short cephalomedullary nail in treating osteoporotic intertrochanteric femur 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.