Open Access
Volume 9, 2023
Article Number 28
Number of page(s) 6
Section Hip
Published online 20 September 2023
  1. Selim AAHA, Beder FK, Algeaidy IT, Farhat AS, Diab NM, Barakat AS (2020) Management of unstable pertrochanteric fractures, evaluation of forgotten treatment options. SICOT-J 6, 21. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Lavini F, Renzi-Brivio L, Aulisa R, Cherubino F, Di Seglio PL, Galante N, Manca M (2008) The treatment of stable and unstable proximal femoral fractures with a new trochanteric nail: results of a multicentre study with the Veronail. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr (Online), 3, 1. [Google Scholar]
  3. Tawari AA, Kempegowda H, Suk M, Horwitz DS (2015) What makes an intertrochanteric fracture unstable in 2015? Does the lateral wall play a role in the decision matrix? J Orthop Trauma 29, S4–S9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS, Karam MD, Kellam JF (2018) Fracture and dislocation classification compendium-2018. J Orthop Trauma 32(Suppl 1), S1–S170. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lee YS, Huang HL, Lo TY, Huang CR (2007) Dynamic hip screw in the treatment of intertrochanteric fractures: a comparison of two fixation methods. Int Orthop 31(5), 683–688. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Caruso G, Bonomo M, Valpiani G, et al. (2017) A six-year retrospective analysis of cut-out risk predictors in cephalomedullary nailing for pertrochanteric fractures: Can the tip-apex distance (TAD) still be considered the best parameter? Bone Joint Res 6(8), 481–488. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hsueh KK, Fang CK, Chen CM, Su YP, Wu HF, Chiu FY (2010) Risk factors in cutout of sliding hip screw in intertrochanteric fractures: an evaluation of 937 patients [published correction appears in Int Orthop. 2012 Jan;36(1):215]. Int Orthop 34(8), 1273–1276. [Google Scholar]
  8. Baumgaertner MR, Curtin SL, Lindskog DM, Keggi JM (1995) The value of the tip-apex distance in predicting failure of fixation of peritrochanteric fractures of the hip. J Bone Jt Surg 77(7), 1058–1064. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Kuzyk PR, Zdero R, Shah S, Olsen M, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH (2012) Femoral head lag screw position for cephalomedullary nails: a biomechanical analysis. J Orthop Trauma 26(7), 414–421. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cleveland M, Bosworth D, Thompson F, Wilson H, Ishizuka T (1959) A ten-year analysis of intertrochanteric fractures of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am 41-A, 1399–1408. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Parker M (1992) Cutting-out of the dynamic hip screw related to its position. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74, 625. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Mao W, He Y-Q, Tang H, Chen X-J, Li L-L, Dong Y-H (2019) A novel angle on helical blade placement in trochanteric fractures – The axis-blade angle. Injury 50(7), 1333–1338. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kane P, Vopat B, Heard W, et al. (2014) Is tip apex distance as important as we think? A biomechanical study examining optimal lag screw placement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(8), 2492–2498. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Singh M, Nagrath AR, Maini PS (1970) Changes in trabecular pattern of the upper end of the femur as an index of osteoporosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52, 457–467. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Chan YH (2003a) Biostatistics102: Quantitative data – parametric & non-parametric tests. Singapore Med J 44(8), 391–396. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Chan YH (2003b) Biostatistics 103: Qualitative data –tests of independence. Singapore Med J 44(10), 498–503. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Kumar R, Indrayan A (2011) Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for medical researchers. Indian Pediatr 48(4), 277–287. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Li S, Chang SM, Jin YM, et al. (2016) A mathematical simulation of the tip-apex distance and the calcar-referenced tip-apex distance for intertrochanteric fractures reduced with lag-screws. Injury 47, 1302–1308. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lopes-Coutinho L, Dias-Carvalho A, Esteves N, Sousa R (2020) Traditional distance “tip-apex” vs. new calcar referenced “tip-apex” – Which one is the best peritrochanteric osteosynthesis failure predictor? Injury 51(3), 674–677. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.