ArticleJournal of orthopaedics
Internal fixation versus endoprosthetic replacement of the proximal femur for metastatic bone disease: Single institutional outcomes.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Design of a Patient-Centered Hierarchal Composite Outcome for a Multi-Center Randomized Controlled Trial in Metastatic Bone Disease.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Trial
- Endoprosthetic reconstruction versus osteosynthesis for metastatic disease of the proximal femur: a population-based cohort study.Journal of bone oncology · 2026Article
- Comparative outcomes of internal fixation versus prosthetic reconstruction in the treatment of proximal femoral metastases: a systematic review and meta-analysis.EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Soft tissue reconstruction using Trevira tube following proximal femur resection and tumorous endoprosthetic replacement.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Implant survival and risk factors for failure after proximal femoral megaprosthetic reconstruction.SICOT-J · 2025Article
- Outcomes of distal femoral replacement versus internal fixation for metastatic bone diseases of the distal femur.Journal of orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study compared internal fixation (IF) to proximal femur replacement (PFR) for proximal femoral metastasis.
methodsBetween 2005 and 2019, 113 lesions underwent IF (
resultsThe 5-year revision risk after IF was 17.6% (95% CI, 9.8%-27.3%) compared to 7.6% (95% CI, 0.3%-28.9%) after PFR (
conclusionsIF may be considered for patients with poor health and a limited prognosis given the less-invasive procedure and shorter hospital stay. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Retrospective Study.
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.