ArticleClinics in orthopedic surgery2023
Does the Periprosthetic Fracture Pattern Depend on the Stem Fixation Method in Total Hip Arthroplasty?
Article in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 2023. 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.
- Vancouver B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur: options for treatment.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Review
- Fixation versus revision arthroplasty for Unified Classification System type B periprosthetic fractures around cemented polished tapered femoral components : a systematic review and meta-analysis.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- Ipsilateral pubic ramus fracture during total hip arthroplasty is not rare: does it matter?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Article
- Digital Templating of Hip Arthroplasty Using Microsoft PowerPoint: A Pilot Study with Technical Details.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Femoral stem taper geometry and porous coating in cementless direct anterior primary total hip arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedics · 2023Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Management of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) is reportedly challenging. Different patterns of PFFs would occur based on whether stem fixation was primarily cemented or cementless and whether these patterns would be associated with clinical outcomes, such as subsidence, fracture union, and complications, after stem revision. Methods: A retrospective comparative study was performed, involving 52 PFF patients treated with tapered fluted modular stems (TFMSs). In the 52 patients with Vancouver B2 or B3, including 21 cemented stems and 31 cementless stems, fracture patterns and bone stock were analyzed. Clinical outcomes after revision surgery using the TFMSs were compared between the two groups. Results: Transverse or short oblique type PFFs occurred around the cemented stem with loosening at the bone-cement interface. The Paprosky type III femoral deficiency and Vancouver type B3 fracture were observed more frequently in the cemented stem group. Otherwise, spiral fractures occurred more frequently in the cementless group ( Conclusions: In our study, it was found that the patterns of transverse or oblique PFFs were more frequently produced with cemented stems, while long spiral fractures were more frequent with cementless stems. Stem subsidence and reoperation related to complications were more common in patients with PFFs around cemented stems than those with PFFs around cementless stems.
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.