ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
An Adams' Arch -based anatomical classification system guiding internal fixation strategies for non-displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: a finite element analysis.
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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFemoral neck fractures constitute the predominant type of hip fracture in the elderly population and pose significant therapeutic challenges. Although internal fixation remains the standard treatment for non-displaced fractures, existing classification systems, such as the traditional anatomical categories (subcapital, transcervical, and basicervical), lack precise anatomical definitions needed to guide instrumentation therapy. Therefore, this study aims to develop a novel classification system based on the Adams' Arch to enhance fixation strategy selection.
methodsForty-two fracture line models were created based on quantified relationships between fracture orientation, the proximity to Adams' Arch, and neck axis alignment. Each model underwent evaluation under two fixation protocols: (1) conventional triple cannulated screw fixation and (2) hybrid fixation combining cannulated screw with medial buttress plating, resulting in 84 computational models. Physiological loading conditions simulating upright human posture were applied with validated boundary constraints.
resultsFirst, regardless of whether the support was positive or negative, smaller angles between the fracture line and the cannulated screws were associated with increased femoral stress, with higher stress observed under positive buttress conditions. Second, as the length of Adams' Arch increased, the stress on cannulated screw 3 in both fixation groups initially rose and then declined.Notably, the cannulated screw group classified as 6-5 failed to converge. Third, increasing Adams' Arch length decreased relative displacement along the X-axis at the fracture site, corresponding with an increased angle between the fracture line and cannulated screw. Moreover, increased femoral neck distance reduced relative displacements along the X- and Y-axes as the fracture line extended further from the femoral neck.
conclusionThis finite element analysis identifies four critical insights: 1. The Adams' Arch-based classification provides effective biomechanical guidance for surgical management of femoral neck fractures (The classification of Subcapital, Transcervical and Basicervical was enhanced). 2.The stress on the cannulated screw peaks at intermediate lengths of the Adams' Arch.with an initial increase followed by a decline. 3. Femoral stress was higher under positive buttress support than under negative buttress conditions. 4. In elderly patients with 6-5 fracture line classification, cannulated screws alone provide insufficient fixation strength; alternative strategies such as medial plate augmentation should be considered.
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.