ArticleThe Journal of international medical research2023
Extraperitoneal pelvic packing versus angiographic embolization for hemodynamically unstable pelvic fractures: a retrospective single-center analysis.
Article in The Journal of international medical research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo retrospectively analyze the clinical data and treatment procedures of angiographic embolization (AE) and extraperitoneal pelvic packing (EPP) for traumatic pelvic fractures in our center for the purpose of providing recommendations on the selection of treatment protocols.
methodsWe analyzed 110 patients with traumatic pelvic fractures treated with AE and EPP from January 2015 to May 2023. The patients were divided into the AE group (69 men, 41 women) and the EPP group (20 men, 12 women). The primary outcomes were the mortality rate and incidence of complications.
resultsThe mortality rate was slightly lower in the AE than EPP group (7.3% vs. 9.4%). The overall blood transfusion volume was lower and the length of hospital stay was shorter in the AE than EPP group (7.79 ± 12.04 vs. 9.14 ± 14.21 units and 20.48 ± 11.32 vs. 22.14 ± 10.47 days).
conclusionsBoth AE and EPP have good treatment effects. AE is preferred for patients in stable condition with severe hemorrhage. This study suggests that EPP should be the primary treatment and that AE should serve as a complementary treatment for critical patients.
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.