ArticleFoot & ankle orthopaedics2026
Primary Tibiotalocalcaneal Nailing vs Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Fragility Ankle Fractures in Older Adults: A Markov Model.
Article in Foot & ankle orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Background: Fragility ankle fractures are common in the elderly population. The cost-effectiveness of primary tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) nailing compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in this population remains unclear. Methods: We constructed a Markov cohort model with a 4-year time horizon to compare TTC nailing vs ORIF for fragility ankle fractures in patients aged 75 years and older. All complication rates were derived from the McDonald et al's (2025) systematic review and meta-analysis. Costs were in 2024 US dollars with 3% annual discounting for costs and outcomes. Probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: In the base case, ORIF yielded 3.210 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (95% credible interval [CrI] 2.785-3.584) at $30 091 (95% CrI $21 426-$40 852) compared with 3.207 QALYs (95% CrI 2.783-3.581) at $33 583 (95% CrI $23 741-$45 447) for TTC nailing. ORIF dominated incremental cost (+$3492, 95% CrI -$11 467 to +$18 273) and incremental QALYs (-0.003, 95% CrI -0.009 to +0.002). The cost differential was driven by the $3000 higher index procedure cost for TTC, partially offset by lower superficial infection (2.1% vs 10.2%). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated 33% probability of cost-effectiveness at $100 000/QALY. All 4 scenario analyses confirmed that ORIF dominated. Conclusion: Under McDonald's pooled estimates, TTC nailing is dominated by ORIF for fragility ankle fractures in older adults. The lower superficial infection rate with TTC does not offset its higher procedure cost and higher rates of nonunion and hardware failure. These findings support ORIF as the preferred strategy from a cost-effectiveness standpoint, although the small incremental differences should be considered alongside clinical factors when selecting treatment. Level of Evidence: Level IV, economic modeling.
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.