ArticleANZ journal of surgery2025
Contemporary Long-Term Patient Reported Outcomes of Pilon Fractures.
Article in ANZ journal of surgery, 2025. 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.
- The functional mechanism and clinical significance of miR-3651 in the healing process of Pilon fractures.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Quality of Life and Functional Impairment After Surgical Treatment of Pilon Fractures-A Case-Control Study with SF-12, EQ-5D-5L and VAS.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- The role and regulatory mechanism of miR-122-5p in the process of pilon fracture healing.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Contemporary Long-Term Patient Reported Outcomes of Pilon Fractures.ANZ journal of surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPilon fractures are historically associated with suboptimal outcomes. No long-term Australian data is available on patient-reported outcomes. We hypothesised that pilon fracture long-term outcomes are inferior to Australian population norms.
methodsA 14-year retrospective study was conducted in a Level-1 trauma centre on AO/OTA type-B/C fractures. Type-A fractures, skeletally immature, interpreter requirement and primary amputation were excluded. Demographics, injury characteristics, management and complications were collected. The primary outcome was SF-36 with adjusted Australian norms.
resultsFrom 127 eligible patients, 73 were included in the study (age: 46 ± 17 years; 50 [69%] males) with 8.7 ± 3.9 years follow-up. Management included ORIF 46 (61%), external fixation (EF) with staged ORIF 17 (23%), definitive EF 4 (5%) and 8 (11%) non-operative. Further surgical intervention was required in 25 (34%) patients, with the majority for hardware removal (14 [19%]). Compared with Australian SF-36 norms, the mean Physical Component Score was lower (44.7 ± 8.9 vs. 50.3, p ≤ 0.001) whereas the Mental Component Score (51.2 ± 12.5 vs. 51.2, p = 0.24) was not. Median return to work was 4.5 months (IQR 5), with 47 (87%) of the 54 employed pre-injury working at 12 months. Two (3.7%) patients did not return to work and 24 (44%) returned at a reduced capacity.
conclusionThis study provides a contemporary reference for pilon fractures managed in Australia. Outcomes were favourable when compared internationally. These patients are likely to resume employment, often at reduced capacity, while experiencing moderate long-term impacts to their physical well-being due to persistent pain.
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.