A New Intramedullary Nail Device for the Treatment of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures: Perioperative Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Traditional short nail fixation devices used for intertrochanteric (IT) fractures of the femur have several surgeon and patient benefits. However, these devices have had a high incidence of complications. A new intramedullary device designed to overcome these shortcomings has become commercially available. The goal of this study was to compare this intramedullary nail device with the traditional dynamic hip screw. METHOD: A prospective cohort study with 60 IT hip fractures was performed. Thirty patients treated with the trochanteric fixation nail (TFN) were compared with 30 patients treated with the dynamic hip screw (DHS) during the same time period. Implant selection was dictated by surgeon randomization. Primary outcomes planned for this study were immediate measures of operative blood loss, surgical time, and incidence of operative complications. Secondary outcome of return to preoperative ambulatory status was also recorded. Follow-up for secondary outcomes was conducted at an average of 6 months after surgery. Perioperative, functional, and radiologic outcome measures were collected. RESULT: No intra- or perioperative complications occurred with the new nail device. Operative time was 10 minutes shorter with TFN (50.7 minutes) compared with DHS (60.4 minutes). No Trendelenburg gait was noted in either group. No femur fractures or distal locking difficulties occurred in the TFN group. Twelve of 17 (71%) TFN patients returned to prefracture ambulation 6 months after surgery compared with only 6 of 18 (33%) DHS patients (p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: The rate of femoral fractures for short femoral nails was decreased compared with historical controls. Improved early mobilization was noted in TFN group.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".