MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002689183 · doi:10.2106/jbjs.h.01735

Femoral Fractures in Adolescents: A Comparison of Four Methods of Fixation

2010· article· en· W2002689183 on OpenAlexaff
Leonhard E. Ramseier, Joseph A. Janicki, Shannon Weir, Unni Narayanan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone fractures and treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntramedullary rodMalunionNonunionSurgeryFixation (population genetics)External fixationPolytraumaExternal fixatorPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of femoral fractures in adolescents is controversial. This study was performed to compare the results and complications of four methods of fixation and to determine the factors related to those complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 194 diaphyseal femoral fractures in 189 children and adolescents treated with elastic stable intramedullary nail fixation, external fixation, rigid intramedullary nail fixation, or plate fixation. After adjustment for age, weight, energy of the injury, polytrauma, fracture level and pattern, and extent of comminution, treatment outcomes were compared in terms of the length of the hospital stay, time to union, and complication rates, including loss of reduction requiring a reoperation, malunion, nonunion, refracture, infection, and the need for a reoperation other than routine hardware removal. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 13.2 years, and their mean weight was 49.5 kg. There was a loss of reduction of two of 105 fractures treated with elastic nail fixation and ten of thirty-three treated with external fixation (p < 0.001). At the time of final follow-up, five patients (two treated with external fixation and one in each of the other groups) had >or=2.0 cm of shortening. Eight of the 104 patients (105 fractures) treated with elastic nail fixation underwent a reoperation (two each because of loss of reduction, refracture, the need for trimming or advancement of the nail, and delayed union or nonunion). Sixteen patients treated with external fixation required a reoperation (ten because of loss of reduction, one for replacement of a pin complicated by infection, one for débridement of the site of a deep infection, three because of refracture, and one for lengthening). One patient treated with a rigid intramedullary nail required débridement at the site of a deep infection, and one underwent removal of a prominent distal interlocking screw. One fracture treated with plate fixation required refixation following refractures. A multivariate analysis with adjustment for baseline differences showed external fixation to be associated with a 12.41-times (95% confidence interval = 2.26 to 68.31) greater risk of loss of reduction and/or malunion than elastic stable intramedullary nail fixation. CONCLUSIONS: External fixation was associated with the highest rate of complications in our series of adolescents treated for a femoral fracture. Although the other three methods yielded comparable outcomes, we cannot currently recommend one method of fixation for all adolescents with a femoral fracture. The choice of fixation will remain influenced by surgeon preference based on expertise and experience, patient and fracture characteristics, and patient and family preferences.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.246

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations85
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Bone and Joint SurgerySame topicBone fractures and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207