Subtrochanteric femoral fractures: A case series of 194 patients treated with long and short intramedullary nails
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: IM nails are the gold standard of subtrochanteric fractures management. Indications to use a short rather than a long nail remain unclear. Operative complications of subtrochanteric fractures reach up to 25%. Objective: Retrospectively compare clinical and radiographic outcome of subtrochanteric fractures treated by long and short intramedullary nailing, analysing rates of complications. Methods: 390 patients were chosen from the archives. 194 patients were available: 70 treated with a short intramedullary nail (Group A), while 124 with long one (Group B). Radiographic evaluation at 6 and 12 months assess failure of the osteosynthesis. Clinical outcomes were the return to normal activities prior trauma and VAS scale. Group A mean age was 81.37 years, group B mean age was 78.9 years (29-99, SD: 15.38). Results: Radiografic Healing was found in 66 patients (94.28%) in group A, while in 116 patients (94.54%) in group B. Pseudarthrosis was found in 4 cases (5.71%) in group A, while in 8 cases (6.45%) in group B. Implant failure occurred in 5 cases: one required revision of fixation, while 4 require hip replacement. 59 patients of group A (84.29%) returned to social life, while 102 patients (81.94%) in group B. Group A mean VAS was 1.55, Group B mean VAS was 1.49. Conclusion: Comparison of the two group showed no differences. Complication percentages are in line with literature. Optimal reduction and fixation allow high percentage of healing and return to social life.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".