ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2008
Surgeons' beliefs and perceptions about removal of orthopaedic implants.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02652611 (The Effect of Sacroiliac), which is not on this map. Cited by 65 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
The Effect of Sacroiliac (SI) Screw Removal on Patient-Reported Pain and Functional Outcomes After Open or Closed Reduction and Internal Fixation of Pelvic Fractures
Who cites it
65 citing papers in PubMed, 173 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mid- to Long-term Outcomes After Weber B-type Ankle Fractures With and Without Syndesmotic Rupture.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Trial
- Re‑fracture risk following implant removal in consolidated hip fractures: a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 575 patients.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Considerations for removal of cephalomedullary screws and blades following intertrochanteric femoral fracture healing: a narrative review.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
- Review
- Comparative analysis of the effects of blade plate retention versus removal on paediatric bone remodelling following proximal femoral osteotomy.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
- Peripheral Neuromodulation and Opioid Sparing Strategies for Mitigating Perioperative Pain in the Stabilization and Hardware Removal of Complex Trimalleolar Fractures: A Case Report.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Implant removal: benefits and drawbacks - Results of a survey with five hundred participants from the Italian Society of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology (SIOT) and comparison with other international trends.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Diverse Views and Practices on the Handling of Explanted Hardware Highlights the Need for Standardized Management.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Management of pediatric femoral neck fractures from classification to surgery: a review of indications based on anatomic and radiographic features of the proximal femur.EFORT open reviews · 2025Review
- Evaluating femoral head collapse risk post-fixation removal: a finite element analysis.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Removing hardware from anterior approaches following acetabular fractures: a challenging yet indicated procedure.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Usefulness of using pure β-TCP bone substitute (Neobone) in post-orthopedic implant removal procedures.PloS one · 2025Article
- The application of ultrasound-guided cannulated screw removal after proximal tibial fracture surgery: a retrospective study.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2025Article
- Ultrasound guidance in the surgical removal of internal fixators after complete healing of limb fractures.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Screw Diameter and Use of a Washer Affect Symptomatic Implant Removal Rates in Pediatric Medial Epicondyle Fractures.Journal of pediatric orthopedics · 2024Article
- Percutaneous removal of hardware after orthopedic surgery: Is it safe? and What are patients saying?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024Article
- Consensus review on peri-implant femur fracture treatment: Peri-Implant Spanish Consensus (PISCO) investigators' recommendations.EFORT open reviews · 2024Review
- Prevention of sclerosis around cannulated screw after treatment of femoral neck fractures with bioceramic nails: a finite element analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Article
- Rates and Factors Associated With Hardware Removal in Physeal Ankle Fractures: Analysis of the Pediatric Health Information System.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2023Article
5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe routine removal of orthopaedic fixation devices after fracture healing remains an issue of debate. There are no evidence-based guidelines on this matter, and little is known on surgeons' practice and perceived effectiveness of implant removal in different clinical settings.
methodsA 41-item questionnaire was distributed to 730 attendees of the AO Principles and Masters Courses of Operative Fracture Treatment in Davos, Switzerland, to assess their attitudes towards removal of different types of implants, and perceived benefits and risks with this common procedure.
resultsThe response rate was 655/730 (89.7%), representing 54.6% of all 1199 course attendees. Surgeons from 65 countries (571 males and 84 females, mean age 39 +/- SD 9 years) took part in the survey. Fifty-eight percent of the participants did not agree that routine implant removal is necessary, and 49% and 58% did not agree that indwelling implants pose an excess risk for fractures or general adverse effects. Forty-eight percent felt that removal is riskier than leaving the implant in situ. Implant removal in symptomatic patients was rated to be moderately effective (mean rating on a 10-point-scale, 5.8, 95% confidence interval 5.7-6.0). Eighty-five percent of all participants agreed that implant removal poses a burden to hospital resources. Surgeons were undetermined whether implant removal is adequately reimbursed by payers of health care services (44% "I-don't-know"-answers).
conclusionMany surgeons refuse a routine implant removal policy, and do not believe in clinically significant adverse effects of retained metal implants. Given the frequency of the procedure in orthopaedic departments worldwide, there is an urgent need for a large randomized trial to determine the efficacy and effectiveness of implant removal with regard to patient-centred outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.