Why the study?
Do intramedullary systems improve outcomes compared to extramedullary devices in patients with subtrochanteric fractures?
Population
107 patients treated for subtrochanteric fractures
Comparison
Intramedullary systems vs Extramedullary devices
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
average 25.5 months (range, six to 96 months)
Authors
Loading...
Extramedullary devices may yield better subtrochanteric fracture outcomes; challenges intramedullary biomechanical preference but leaves open confirmation in RCTs.
Do intramedullary systems improve outcomes compared to extramedullary devices in patients with subtrochanteric fractures?
In a retrospective review of subtrochanteric fractures, extramedullary devices yielded better clinical results than intramedullary systems despite the latter's theoretical biomechanical advantages.
LECHNER et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: