“…Computational studies using the finite element method have also been used to find which blade positions lead to less bone damage [5,[11][12][13][14][15][16]. Considering static analyses of stress or strain, and maximum principal stress or strain criteria as a measure of the risk of cut-out, Arias-Blanco et al [5,16], Goffin et al [11], Celik et al [12], and Lee et al [13] investigated the influence of different anterior-posterior and superior-inferior blade positions on the risk of cut-out. Two primary factors set these studies apart: the implants considered, which included the Proximal Femoral Nail Anti-rotation (PFNA) implant by Synthes (Oberdof, Switzerland) [5,16], the Omega3 Compression Hip Screw by Stryker Osteosynthesis (Schoenkirchen, Germany) [11], the Dynamic Hip Screw by Tipsan Tibbi Aletler (Bornova, Turkey) [12], and the Asia Anatomic Anteversion Hip Nail by A Plus Biotechnology (New Taipei City, Taiwan) [13]; and the fractures considered, which included a stable fracture classified as 31-A1 in the Müller AO classification system [5,13,16] and an unstable 31-A2 fracture, with an intrusion distance of 30% [11,12].…”