ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Clinical efficacy of supine direct-superior approach versus posterolateral approach in hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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 evaluate the clinical efficacy of hemiarthroplasty performed via the supine direct superior approach (DSA) in elderly patients with femoral neck fractures (FNF) and to compare outcomes with those of the conventional posterolateral approach (PLA).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 75 elderly patients with FNF who underwent hemiarthroplasty at the 908th Hospital of Chinese People's Liberation Army Joint Logistics Support Force between January 2021 and January 2024. Patients were divided into a supine DSA group (n = 35) and a PLA group (n = 40). Perioperative indicators, postoperative functional recovery, pain scores, and complication rates were compared between the two groups. The primary outcome measure was the Harris Hip Score (HHS), evaluated at postoperative day 1, day 3, and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively.
resultsCompared with the PLA group, the supine DSA group had a slightly longer operative time (79.0 ± 10.7 vs. 72.5 ± 10.0 min), but significantly less intraoperative blood loss (149.1 ± 37.4 vs. 219.8 ± 37.2 mL), shorter incision length [5.0 (5.0,6.0) vs. 11.0 (10.0,12.0) cm], earlier ambulation time (12.8 ± 2.5 vs. 16.2 ± 2.8 h), lower postoperative drainage volume (70.3 ± 19.3 vs. 105.0 ± 20.0 mL), and shorter length of hospital stay [7.0 (6.0,9.0) vs. 10.0 (8.0,12.0) days] (all P < 0.05). HHS were significantly higher and VAS pain scores significantly lower in the DSA group at postoperative day 1, day 3, and 1 month (P < 0.05). No significant differences were observed between groups at 3 months or later. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the DSA group (P < 0.05), particularly hip dislocation and deep vein thrombosis.
conclusionsSupine DSA demonstrates clinical advantages in the treatment of elderly FNF, including reduced surgical trauma, faster early functional recovery, and lower complication rates, making it a safe and effective alternative to the conventional PLA.
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.