Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34737554›Full record

ArticleClinical interventions in aging2021

The Outcomes of Cemented Femoral Revisions for Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in the Elderly: Comparison with Cementless Stems.

Pavel Sponer, Martin Korbel, Michal Grinac, Libor Prokes, Ales Bezrouk, Tomas Kucera

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Comparative outcomes of uncemented and cemented stem revision in managing periprosthetic femoral fractures: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024
    Article
  6. Cemented vs cementless stems for revision arthroplasties due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pavel SponerDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0003-1794-2224
Martin KorbelDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Michal GrinacDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Libor ProkesDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.
Ales BezroukDepartment of Medical Biophysics, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-2397-3847
Tomas KuceraDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Hradec Králové, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0002-7399-3993
Charles University · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe present study compares the outcome of the long cemented stem and the revision uncemented stem used in periprosthetic femoral fractures. We propose that the revision with a long stem cemented prosthesis does not compromise fracture healing. PATIENTS AND

methodsA consecutive series of 37 patients, operated between 2010 and 2017, were enrolled in a retrospective analysis. A long cemented stem was implanted in 21 patients (study group; age at operation: 63 to 89 years). A distally tapered fluted uncemented stem was used in 16 patients (control group; age at operation: 35 to 77 years). The clinical outcome was evaluated with Merle d'Aubigné and Postel scoring system. Standard radiographs were taken before surgery, at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively, and last follow-up. Any and all complications during the follow-up period were recorded.

resultsAlthough a significant difference (

conclusionBased on our results, periprosthetic fractures of the femur after a total hip arthroplasty were associated with significant morbidity and increased mortality in elderly patients. Revision with a long-stem cemented prosthesis provided early pain-free weight-bearing without compromising the healing of femoral fractures in elderly patients with osteoporotic bone, altered mobility, poor balance, and reduced cognitive capacity.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipFemoral FracturesHip ProsthesisPeriprosthetic FracturesAgedAged, 80 and overFemurHumansMiddle AgedReoperationRetrospective Studiescemented stemperiprosthetic hip fracturesrevision total hip arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID34737554
PMCPMC8558102
OpenAlexW3208009754

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.