ArticleScientific reports2023
Surgical outcomes of acetabular fracture of elderly patients with superomedial dome impaction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF) for Acetabular Fractures in the Elderly: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The archives of bone and joint surgery · 2026Review
- Rehabilitation Protocols for Surgically Treated Acetabular Fractures in Older Adults: Current Practices and Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Mid-term outcomes of acetabular fractures treated with acute fix and replace versus ORIF in the elderly: a multicentric study with minimum 5-year follow-up.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- The infraacetabular screw versus the antegrade posterior column screw in acetabulum fractures with posterior column involvement: a biomechanical comparison.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 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
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the outcomes of elderly acetabular fractures according to the reduction of impacted dome fragments. A retrospective cohort study was performed in two institutions. Fifty-four patients aged ≥ 60 years with acetabular fractures were enrolled. Data for dome impaction and postoperative reduction was collected. Patients were divided into the good reduction group (displacement ≤ 3 mm) and poor reduction group (displacement > 3 mm). Postoperative osteoarthritis (OA), Harris hip score (HHS), total hip arthroplasty conversion, good/poor outcomes were compared between the two groups. The good reduction group (N = 45) demonstrated a lower proportion of radiographic OA (18 vs. 77%, P = 0.001), higher HHS (82.1 vs. 68.6, P = 0.022), and higher proportion of good outcomes than the poor reduction group (N = 9) (89 vs. 22%, P < 0.001). In a subgroup analysis of the patients with dome impaction, the good reduction group had a higher proportion of good outcomes (80 vs. 20%, P = 0.031). On comparing within the good reduction group, dome impaction did not influence clinical outcomes. Elderly acetabular fractures demonstrated favorable outcomes when adequate reduction was achieved even with dome impaction. Well-reduced dome impaction could achieve satisfactory outcomes in elderly acetabular fractures.
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.