Far Cortical Locking Versus Standard Constructs for Locked Plate Fixation in the Treatment of Acute, Displaced Fractures of the Distal Femur
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fixation of distal femoral fractures remains a challenge, and nonunions are common with standard constructs. Far cortical locking (FCL) constructs have been purported to lead to improved fracture-healing as compared with that achieved with traditional locking bridge plates. We sought to test this hypothesis in a comparative effectiveness clinical trial. METHODS: This randomized trial was performed across 16 centers and included adult patients with an AO/OTA type 33A or 33C distal femoral fracture that was suitable for bridging fixation. We excluded patients with periprosthetic fractures. Participants were randomly assigned to either FCL fixation or standard locking plate fixation. The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite of radiographic and clinical fracture-healing at 3 months after fixation. We estimated between-group differences with use of the win ratio approach. Secondary outcomes included radiographic healing, clinical fracture-healing, complications, reoperations, and health-related quality of life (Short Form-36 Health Survey Version 2 [SF-36] Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary scores) at 3, 6, and 12 months after fixation. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 193 patients to treatment with either FCL screws (96 patients) or standard screws (97 patients). The study population had a mean age of 63.4 years, consisted predominantly of women (68%), and was well-balanced between AO/OTA 33A and 33C fractures. Based on 4,355 pairwise comparisons, the calculated win ratio was 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.79; p = 0.45), indicating that patients assigned to FCL screws had better outcomes in 51% of the comparisons. Radiographic healing did not differ significantly between the groups (odds ratio, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.69 to 2.72; p = 0.38), nor did Function IndeX for Trauma (FIX-IT) scores (p = 0.41). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of SF-36 Physical Component Summary scores at 3 months or in the change in scores at 12 months after fixation. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter randomized trial of adult patients with an AO/OTA type 33A or 33C distal femoral fracture, similar clinical and radiographic healing outcomes were observed in the FCL and standard fixation groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".