ReviewOrthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[Surgical treatment strategies for periprosthetic femoral fractures of type Vancouver B].
Review in Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Primary total knee arthroplasty in geriatric patients with tibial plateau fractures].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Vancouver B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur: options for treatment.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Review
- [Treatment of proximal periprosthetic femoral fractures : Options for revision arthroplasty].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- [Surgical treatment strategies for interprosthetic femoral fractures].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Advancements in Total Knee Arthroplasty over the Last Two Decades.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Multicenter Study of Comorbidities in Patients with Periprosthetic Fractures After Total Hip Arthroplasty and Their Association with Immediate Postoperative Complications.Clinics and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe demographic shift is expected to lead to a further increase in the number of hip joint replacements. Accordingly, as has already been observed in recent years, a further increase in periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPF) is to be expected. PPF is now the third most common reason for revision surgery after hip arthroplasty.
objectivesTaking into account the known risk factors for PPF, fracture treatment strategies are evaluated based on current evidence in order to make recommendations for practice.
methodsNarrative review.
resultsOverall, the literature is very heterogeneous and evidence is lacking for many aspects. Numerous recommendations are based on non-randomized studies with low patient count. Mortality after PPF is high regardless of the treatment chosen. Age and bone quality influence the partly heterogeneous results and play a role in the treatment strategy. The use of both cemented and uncemented stems in revision surgery due to proximal PPF is frequently described in the literature. There are no significant differences in terms of outcome. The advantage of uncemented modular stems is currently not supported by the literature.
conclusionsAn individualized approach to the treatment of PPF is recommended, considering environmental factors and comorbidities. In geriatric patients, full weight-bearing of the lower extremity should be aimed for postoperatively to avoid complications.
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.