ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Open reduction and internal fixation of crescent fracture-dislocation: anterior or posterior approach?
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Surgical Management of Sacroiliac Joint Dislocations and Crescent Fractures: A Nine-Year Clinical Follow-Up.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Surgery Using Combined Iliac Lumbar and Posterior Closed Screws for Pelvic Stability Maintenance.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Outcome of pelvic ring injuries.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTo date, the approach that prevails in the open reduction and internal fixation of crescent fracture-dislocations (CFD) remains unknown. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of CFD treated via the anterior or posterior approach. MATERIALS AND
methodsData from 64 cases of CFDs openly reduced through an anterior (group A, n = 31) or a posterior (group B, n = 33) approach were retrospectively analyzed. Functional results, reduction quality, residual displacements in the axial and coronal planes, pelvic asymmetry deformity, and correlations between Day's classification were compared. Complications and fracture union were also recorded. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months.
resultsThe functional scores were similar between the two groups, and all fractures achieved good or excellent reduction postoperatively. In the coronal plane, the excellent/good ratio in group B was higher than in group A. The mean residual displacement in the coronal plane was significantly higher in group A than in group B, with group A showing greater displacement in both planes for Day I fractures and in the coronal plane for Day II fractures. The residual displacement in both planes for Day III fractures was comparable between the groups. The pelvic asymmetry deformity was equal between the two groups and among the different Day's fracture types.
conclusionsOpen reduction and internal fixation of CFDs obtained satisfactory outcomes through an anterior or posterior approach. The posterior approach achieved a better sacroiliac joint reduction. The optimal indication for the posterior approach was a Day I fracture, followed by a Day II fracture. No correlation was found between the surgical approach and reduction quality in Day III fractures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38195950What 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.