Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33880141›Full record

ReviewMalaysian orthopaedic journal2021

Fat Embolism Syndrome - A Qualitative Review of its Incidence, Presentation, Pathogenesis and Management.

C Timon, C Keady, C G Murphy

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Malaysian orthopaedic journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mechanical embolectomy of a large iliocaval fat embolus.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

C TimonDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
C KeadyDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
C G MurphyDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Galway University Hospitals, Galway, Ireland.
University Hospital Galway · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fat Embolism Syndrome (FES) is a poorly defined clinical phenomenon which has been attributed to fat emboli entering the circulation. It is common, and its clinical presentation may be either subtle or dramatic and life threatening. This is a review of the history, causes, pathophysiology, presentation, diagnosis and management of FES. FES mostly occurs secondary to orthopaedic trauma; it is less frequently associated with other traumatic and atraumatic conditions. There is no single test for diagnosing FES. Diagnosis of FES is often missed due to its subclinical presentation and/or confounding injuries in more severely injured patients. FES is most frequently diagnosed using the Gurd and Wilson criteria, like its rivals it is not clinically validated. Although FES is a multi-system condition, its effects in the lung, brain, cardiovascular system and skin cause most morbidity. FES is mostly a self-limiting condition and treatment is supportive in nature. Many treatments have been trialled, most notably corticosteroids and heparin, however no validated treatment has been established.

Indexed as

fat embolismfat embolism syndromeorthopaedicstrauma

Identifiers

PMID33880141
PMCPMC8043637
OpenAlexW3149119526

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.