FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2884340128> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2884340128 endingPage "99" @default.
• W2884340128 startingPage "92" @default.
• W2884340128 abstract "To analyze the literature on efficacy of dynamamization vs exchange nailing in treatment of delayed and non-union femur fractures.Ultimately, 31 peer-reviewed articles with 644 exchanged nailing patients and 131 dynamization patients were identified and analyzed. The following key words were inputted in different combinations in order to search the field of publications in its entirety: non-union, delayed union, ununited, femur fracture, femoral fracture, exchange nailing, dynaiz(s)ation, secondary nailing, dynamic, static, and nail revision. The initial search yielded over 150 results, and was refined based on the inclusion criteria: Only studies reporting on humans, non-unions and delayed unions, and the usage of exchange nailing and/or dynamization as a secondary treatment after failed IM nailing. The resulting 66 articles were obtained through online journal access. The results were filtered further based on the exclusion criteria: No articles that failed to report overall union rates, differentiate between success rates of their reported techniques, or articles that analyzed less than 5 patients.Exchange nailing lead to fracture union in 84.785% of patients compared to the 66.412% of dynamization with statistically comparable durations until union (5.193 ± 2.310 mo and 4.769 ± 1.986 mo respectively). Dynamically locking exchange nails resulted in an average union time of 5.208 ± 2.475 mo compared to 5.149 ± 2.366 mo (P = 0.8682) in statically locked exchange nails. The overall union rate of the two procedures, statically and dynamically locked exchange nailing yielded union rates of 84.259% and 82.381% respectively. Therefore, there was no significant difference between the different locking methods of exchange nailing for union rate or time to union at a significance value of P < 0.05. The analysis showed exchange nailing to be the more successful choice in the treatment of femoral non-unions in respect to its higher success rate (491/567 EN, 24/57 dynam, P < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference between the success rates of the two procedures for delayed union fractures (25/27 EN, 45/55 dynam, P = 0.3299). Nevertheless, dynamization was more efficient in the treatment of delayed unions (at rates comparable to exchange nailing) than in the treatment of non-unions.In conclusion, after examination of factors, dynamization is recommended treatment of delayed femur fractures, while exchange nailing is the treatment of choice for non-unions." @default.
• W2884340128 created "2018-08-03" @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5005003253 @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5030081056 @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5065811941 @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5068806771 @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5070478129 @default.
• W2884340128 creator A5074296889 @default.
• W2884340128 date "2018-07-18" @default.
• W2884340128 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W2884340128 title "Systematic review of dynamization <i>vs</i> exchange nailing for delayed/non-union femoral fractures" @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1592770375 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1964677217 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1966242159 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1968502311 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1979262871 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1980022962 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1986068659 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1986741228 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1991251098 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W1994796478 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2007853014 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2009918659 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2013049842 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2018311296 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2023104430 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2040316752 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2048764052 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2078416130 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2080296946 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2085934384 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2088785400 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2089415955 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2093105164 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2099037075 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2112039587 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2115725474 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2138917456 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2160194414 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2160480316 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2180547351 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2221648757 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2325285801 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2343068527 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2416190059 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2509261736 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W4245556440 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W98371553 @default.
• W2884340128 cites W2410473383 @default.
• W2884340128 doi "https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v9.i7.92" @default.
• W2884340128 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/6068728" @default.
• W2884340128 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30079298" @default.
• W2884340128 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2884340128 type Work @default.
• W2884340128 sameAs 2884340128 @default.
• W2884340128 citedByCount "15" @default.
• W2884340128 countsByYear W28843401282020 @default.
• W2884340128 countsByYear W28843401282021 @default.
• W2884340128 countsByYear W28843401282022 @default.
• W2884340128 countsByYear W28843401282023 @default.
• W2884340128 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5005003253 @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5030081056 @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5065811941 @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5068806771 @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5070478129 @default.
• W2884340128 hasAuthorship W2884340128A5074296889 @default.
• W2884340128 hasBestOaLocation W28843401281 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C199343813 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C2777596629 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C2779330695 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C2780554211 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C29694066 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C3018021831 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C3018917446 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C141071460 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C142724271 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C199343813 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C204787440 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C2777596629 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C2779330695 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C2780554211 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C29694066 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C3018021831 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C3018917446 @default.
• W2884340128 hasConceptScore W2884340128C71924100 @default.
• W2884340128 hasIssue "7" @default.
• W2884340128 hasLocation W28843401281 @default.
• W2884340128 hasLocation W28843401282 @default.
• W2884340128 hasLocation W28843401283 @default.
• W2884340128 hasLocation W28843401284 @default.
• W2884340128 hasOpenAccess W2884340128 @default.
• W2884340128 hasPrimaryLocation W28843401281 @default.
• W2884340128 hasRelatedWork W1534238208 @default.

• next