Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 320

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Prospective, Randomized Study of Intramedullary Nails Inserted With and Without Reaming for the Treatment of Open and Closed Fractures of the Tibial Shaft

Finkemeier, Christopher G., Schmidt, Andrew H., Kyle, Richard F., Templeman, David C., Varecka, Thomas F.·2000·Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine if there are differences in healing, complications, or number of procedures required to obtain union among open and closed tibia fractures treated with intramedullary (IM) nails inserted with and without reaming. DESIGN: Prospective, surgeon-randomized comparative study. SETTING: Level One trauma center. PATIENTS: Ninety-four consecutive patients with unstable closed and open (excluding Gustilo Grade IIIB and IIIC) fractures of the tibial shaft treated with IM nail insertion between November 1, 1994, and June 30, 1997. INTERVENTION: Interlocked IM nail insertion with and without medullary canal reaming. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to union, type and incidence of complications, and number of secondary procedures performed to obtain union. RESULTS: For open fractures, there were no significant differences in the time to union or number of additional procedures performed to obtain union in patients with reamed nail insertion compared with those without reamed insertion. A higher percentage of closed fractures were healed at four months after reamed nail insertion compared with unreamed insertion (p = 0.040), but there was not a difference at six and twelve months. More secondary procedures were needed to obtain union after unreamed nail insertion for the treatment of closed tibia fractures, but the difference was not statistically significant given the limited power of our study (p = 0.155). Broken screws were seen only in patients treated with smaller-diameter nails inserted without reaming, and the majority occurred in patients who were noncompliant with weight-bearing restrictions. There were no differences in rates of infection or compartment syndrome. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of reamed insertion of IM nails for the treatment of closed tibia fractures, which led to earlier time to union without increased complications. In addition, canal reaming did not increase the risk of complications in open tibia fractures.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00005131-200003000-00007

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 320

Metadata

Authors
Finkemeier, C. G., Schmidt, A. H., Kyle, R. F., Templeman, D. C., & Varecka, T. F.
Venue
Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Published
2000-03
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
187-193
ISSN
0890-5339 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W161639640
Cited by
320
References
0
FWCI
5.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Prospective, Randomized Study of Intramedullary Nails Inserted With and Without Reaming for the Treatment of Open and Closed Fractures of the Tibial Shaft. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/00005131-200003000-00007
The paper
Finkemeier, C. G., Schmidt, A. H., Kyle, R. F., Templeman, D. C., & Varecka, T. F. (2000). A Prospective, Randomized Study of Intramedullary Nails Inserted With and Without Reaming for the Treatment of Open and Closed Fractures of the Tibial Shaft. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005131-200003000-00007

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.