Intertrochanteric fractures treated with proximal femoral bionic nail versus proximal femoral nail antirotation versus InterTan Nail: A meta-analysis.

Thomas Cho, Kriti Devgan, Nipun U Jayatissa, David Yatsonsky, Jiayong Liu

Abstract readReview

In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Thomas ChoDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, 43614, USA.

Kriti DevganDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, 43614, USA.

Nipun U JayatissaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, 43614, USA.

David YatsonskyDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, 43614, USA.

Jiayong LiuDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, 43614, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intertrochanteric fractures, common in the elderly, are often treated with intramedullary (IM) nails. The comparison of outcomes for different IM nails has not been thoroughly evaluated. This meta-analysis compares postoperative outcomes of PFNA, InterTan, and the newer PFBN. PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched until April 2025. Comparative studies evaluating ≥2 IM nails reporting key outcomes were included. Outcomes included union/weight-bearing/hospital stay times, operative time, blood loss, complications (delayed/non-union, hardware failure, infections, deep vein thrombosis, femoral head necrosis, screw cutout), and Harris Hip Score (HHS) at 6/12 months. Analyses used Review Manager 5.4: mean difference (MD) for continuous variables (inverse variance) and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous variables (Mantel-Haenszel). Significance: Level of evidence: 3.

Indexed as

InterTanIntertrochanteric fractureOutcomesProximal femoral bionic nailProximal femoral nail antirotation

Identifiers

PMID42293799

DOI10.1016/j.jor.2026.03.020

PMCPMC13261714

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.