ReviewDer Radiologe2020
[Radiological diagnosis of pelvic ring fractures].
Review in Der Radiologe, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pelvic Fractures in Adults and the Importance of Associated Injuries-A Current Multi-Disciplinary Approach.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
- Enhancing fracture diagnosis in pelvic X-rays by deep convolutional neural network with synthesized images from 3D-CT.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Bone cement reinforcement improves the therapeutic effects of screws in elderly patients with pelvic fragility factures.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2024Article
- Consensus for management of sacral fractures: from the diagnosis to the treatment, with a focus on the role of decompression in sacral fractures.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2023Article
- [Reliability of the FFP classification in pelvic fractures].Der Unfallchirurg · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
epidemiologyTraumatic fractures of the pelvic ring are relatively rare, but are associated with increased risk of mortality. Depending on injury mechanism and main vector of energy impact, a distinction is made between anteroposterior compression, lateral compression, and vertical shear (Young and Burgess classification), while the stability-related classification according to Tile distinguishes between type A (stable), type B (rotationally unstable) and type C (completely unstable). A comprehensive modern classification is given by the AO/OTA. RADIOLOGICAL FRACTURE DIAGNOSIS: Plain pelvis x‑rays lack sufficient sensitivity but are still used to detect highly unstable pelvic fractures. CT has superior sensitivity and specificity. In addition to fracture classification, CT allows reliable assessment of associated vascular and bladder/urethral injuries and large soft tissue hemorrhage. MRI is unparalleled in showing bone marrow edema, cauda and plexus complications, and peripelvic soft tissue damage. MRI may also prove to be a valuable diagnostic tool for pelvic ring injuries in children, adolescents and young women, provided they are hemodynamically stable. Angiography, ultrasonography and bone scintigraphy are additional important diagnostic and therapeutic options. PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS: Knowledge of basic pelvic trauma mechanisms is important to understand the potential severity of traumatic pelvic fractures and to classify them correctly in terms of stability. Being familiar with typical concomitant injuries in pelvic ring fractures allows reliable diagnosis and their communication with the clinician. CT remains the "diagnostic workhorse". In fragile pelvic fractures, the often prolonged course with fracture progression must be taken into account, which is why MRI is of particular importance herein.
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.