ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
Unimalleolar Versus Bimalleolar Fixation in Bi- or Trimalleolar Ankle Fracture
A one third of all ankle fractures are bi- or trimalleolar. Traditionally these fractures are treated by both medial and lateral osteosynthesis, sometimes accompanied by osteosynthesis of the posterior malleolus. There is significant evidence that fractures of the lateral malleolus can be treated conservatively if the medial side is stable. However, there isn't a single study comparing standard bi- or trimalleolar fixation with only medial side osteosynthesis and postoperative immobilization with a cast.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Fixation of the Posterior Malleolus in Medium-sized Trimalleolar AO Weber-B Fractures.#830263
- Weber B Ankle Fractures With Associated Posterior Malleolus Fracture#812827
- Is Univalving or Bivalving of Long Arm Casts for Forearm Fractures Necessary?#825001
- Plate Fixation of Distal Femur Fractures: A Protocol for a Study of Two Plate Options#838428
- DIFFIR - Geriatric Distal Femur Fixation Versus Replacement#1045908
Record · ID 870927
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive