ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Enhanced bone exposure via laparoscopy in acetabulum and pelvic ring surgeries.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility study of a robot-assisted endoscopic technique for plate osteosyntheses of the acetabulum and anterior pelvic ring.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2026Article
- Functional and Vascular Outcomes of Posterior Acetabular Wall Osteosynthesis via the Kocher-Langenbeck Approach: A Dynamic Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn orthopaedic surgery, achieving optimal exposure for acetabular and pelvic ring fractures with minimal invasiveness remains a challenge. This study compares bone exposure in key pelvic zones using an endoscopic approach versus the AIP (Modified Stoppa) in cadaveric specimens. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe dissected ten adult cadaveric bodies, obtained from our institution's body donation program, using an extraperitoneal endoscopic dissection on one side and an AIP approach on the other. Bone areas were marked at each step of dissection by drill holes to measure the bone exposure surface for each zone (true and false pelvis) between the laparoscopic and open approaches. A Student's t test was used to compare the exposure areas obtained.
resultsThe average age of the cadavers was 83 years, with a balanced representation of genders (60% male, 40% female). Comparison of zones between endoscopy and AIP found for Zone 1: 1.4 cm
conclusionOur study demonstrates that the endoscopic method provides comparable visualization of the different pelvic zones compared to the open method (AIP), with enhanced access to Zone 4, a crucial area in managing acetabulum and pelvic ring fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, cadaveric study.
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.