Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27008214›Full record

ReviewDer Unfallchirurg2016

[Importance of revision- and tumor-endoprosthetics in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the lower extremity].

P M Prodinger, N Harrasser, C Suren, F Pohlig, H Mühlhofer, J Schauwecker, R von Eisenhart-Rothe

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Unfallchirurg, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 98% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

P M ProdingerKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
N HarrasserKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
C SurenKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
F PohligKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
H MühlhoferKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
J SchauweckerKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
R von Eisenhart-RotheKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universität München, Ismaninger Straße 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. eisenhart@tum.de.
Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie, Physikalische Medizin und Rehabilitation · DEKlinikum rechts der Isar · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periprosthetic fractures of hip and knee prostheses are gaining clinical significance due to the increasing numbers of of primary arthroplasties. Additionally, these fractures are often associated with poor bone quality or present in patients after multiple revision procedures and concomitant excessive bone defects precluding those patients to be adequately treated by conventional osteosynthesis. Revision implants provide a wide range of options for the treatment of these fractures in order to achieve good clinical results. In the acetabular region cavitary defects associated with periprosthetic fractures can be treated by the use of megacups. Extensive segmental defects and pelvic discontinuity necessitate the use of cups with additional iliac support or even customized implants. Proximal femoral fractures can usually be fixed with modular stems and diaphyseal anchorage. Periprosthetic knee joint fractures can be treated with revision implants with modular sleeves or augment-combinations allowing sufficient bridging of bony defects. Functional reconstruction or refixation of the extensor mechanism is of crucial importance.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineFracture Fixation, InternalHip FracturesHip ProsthesisHumansKnee InjuriesKnee ProsthesisNeoplasmsPeriprosthetic FracturesReoperationShoulder ProsthesisTreatment OutcomeAugmentation combinationsHipKneeMega-implantsPeriprosthetic fracture

Identifiers

PMID27008214
OpenAlexW2312891282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.