Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38451303›Full record

Observational studyJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2024

Optimizing periprosthetic fracture management and in-hospital outcome: insights from the PIPPAS multicentric study of 1387 cases in Spain.

PIPPAS Study Group

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readObservational StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04663893 (Peri-Implant and Peri-Prosthetic Fractures), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04663893 recruitingnot on this map

Peri-Implant and Peri-Prosthetic Fractures: Epidemiology, Morbility, Mortality, Treatment and Functional Outcome Analysis. A Prospective Multi Center Observational Collaborative Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorHospital Clínico Universitario de ValladolidRan2021 to 2027Enrolled2,500ConditionsPeriprosthetic Fracture of the Upper or Lower Limb, Peri-implant Fracture of the Upper or Lower Limb, Periprosthetic Fractures, Peri-implant Fracture
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiofilm-coated intramedullary nailing for tibial and femoral diaphyseal fractures at high-risk infection: outcomes of 103 consecutive patients.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026
    Observational
  2. Article
  3. Internal fixation versus revision arthroplasty for Vancouver B2-B3 fractures: mortality and functional outcomes in frail patients. Insights from the PIPPAS study of 485 patients.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2025
    Observational
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 20 institutions in 2 countries.

PIPPAS Study Group
Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valladolid · ESHospital Clínic de Barcelona · ESHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESHospital Italiano de Buenos Aires · ARHospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova · ESHospital Universitario de Guadalajara · ESResearch Institute Hospital 12 de Octubre · ESVall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ESAlthaia · ESComplexo Hospitalario Universitario A Coruña · ESHospital de Basurto · ESHospital de Sant Pau · ESHospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón · ESHospital Sierrallana · ESHospital Universitario de Burgos · ESHospital Universitario Lucus Augusti · ESHospital Universitario Puerta de Hierro Majadahonda · ESHospital Universitario San Agustín · ESBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESComplejo Hospitalario de Salamanca · ES

Funding

AO Trauma Spain 20-2041Consejería de Educación, Junta de Castilla y León GRS: 2371/A/21
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe incidence of all periprosthetic fractures (PPF), which require complex surgical treatment associated with high morbidity and mortality, is predicted to increase. The evolving surgical management has created a knowledge gap regarding its impact on immediate outcomes. This study aimed to describe current management strategies for PPF and their repercussions for in-hospital outcomes as well as to evaluate their implications for the community.

methodsPIPPAS (Peri-Implant PeriProsthetic Survival Analysis) was a prospective multicentre observational study of 1387 PPF performed during 2021. Descriptive statistics summarized the epidemiology, fracture characteristics, management, and immediate outcomes. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was employed to evaluate potential predictors of in-hospital mortality, complications, discharge status, and weight-bearing restrictions.

resultsThe study encompassed 32 (2.3%) shoulder, 4 (0.3%) elbow, 751 (54.1%) hip, 590 (42.5%) knee, and 10 (0.7%) ankle PPF. Patients were older (median 84 years, IQR 77-89), frail [median clinical frailty scale (CFS) 5, IQR 3-6], presented at least one comorbidity [median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) 5, IQR 4-7], were community dwelling (81.8%), and had outdoor ambulation ability (65.6%). Femoral knee PPF were most frequently associated with uncemented femoral components, while femoral hip PPF occurred equally in cemented and uncemented stems. Patients were managed surgically (82%), with co-management (73.9%), through open approaches (85.9%) after almost 4 days (IQR, 51.9-153.6 h), with prosthesis revision performed in 33.8% of femoral hip PPF and 6.5% of femoral knee PPF. For half of the patients, the discharge instructions mandated weight-bearing restrictions. In-hospital mortality rates were 5.2% for all PPF and 6.2% for femoral hip PPF. Frailty, age > 84 years, mild cognitive impairment, CFS > 3, CCI > 3, and non-geriatric involvement were candidate predictors for in-hospital mortality, medical complications, and discharge to a nursing care facility. Management involving revision arthroplasty by experienced surgeons favoured full weight-bearing, while an open surgical approach favoured weight-bearing restrictions.

conclusionsCurrent arthroplasty fixation check and revision rates deviate from established guidelines, yet full weight-bearing is favoured. A surgical delay of over 100 h and a lack of geriatric co-management were related to in-hospital mortality and medical complications. This study recommends judicious hypoaggressive approaches. Addressing complications and individualizing the surgical strategy can lead to enhanced functional outcomes, alleviating the economic and social burdens upon hospital discharge. Level of Evidence Level IV case series.

trial registrationregistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04663893), protocol ID: PI 20-2041.

Indexed as

FrailtyPeriprosthetic FracturesAgedAged, 80 and overFemurHumansProspective StudiesSpainEpidemiologyFracture fixationFrailtyGeriatric co-managementIncidenceManagementMortalityOutcomePeriprosthetic fractureReplacement

Identifiers

PMID38451303
PMCPMC10920552
OpenAlexW4392550022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.