ArticleInternational orthopaedics2020
Internal fixation and revision arthroplasty for interprosthetic femoral fractures: a case series of fifty patients.
Article in International orthopaedics, 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcome of surgical fixation of interprosthetic femur fractures: a case series in a district general hospital.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- [Surgical treatment strategies for interprosthetic femoral fractures].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Interimplant femoral fracture: analysis of risk factors.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2024Article
- [Treatment aspects of interprosthetic femur fractures-retrospective analysis of 70 patients].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- A systematic review of the surgical outcomes of interprosthetic femur fractures.Journal of orthopaedicsReview
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to assess patients treated for interprosthetic femoral fractures (IFFs).
methodBased on our database, we performed a retrospective single-center analysis of patients who underwent surgery for the treatment of IFFs. We evaluated patient demographics, fracture patterns, type of surgery, revision, and mortality for a minimum of one year after treatment. Outcomes were assessed via telephone using the Parker score.
resultsFifty consecutive patients were enrolled. An analysis of fracture patterns revealed three different types: proximal (n = 19), intermediate (n = 13), and distal (n = 18). Treatment included internal fixation for stable components and revision arthroplasty for loose implants; and a lateral locking plate was the most commonly applied device. The mean follow-up time of the total sample was 5.7 years after the operation. The total revision rate was 22%, and the highest revision rate was documented for revision arthroplasty. The one year mortality rate for the sample was 14%, and fracture patterns and treatment revealed no effects on mortality. Living patients (n = 23) were followed up for an average of 4.9 years after treatment. Only six patients reported the best Parker score (mean, 5.0; range 0-9).
conclusionIFFs can be divided into three groups irrespective of the type of stem or bone quality, but fixation (stable or loose) must also be considered to determine the treatment. Fracture patterns and treatment revealed no effects on mortality. There are many treatment options but no single solution for IFFs.
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.