ArticleThe Iowa orthopaedic journal2025
Revision Rates for Acute Versus Delayed Total Hip Arthroplasty After Acetabular Fracture.
Article in The Iowa orthopaedic journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has demonstrated utility in expediting return to function in the management of acetabular fractures. Despite its increased utilization, optimal timing to minimize complications and need for revision remains controversial and is often left to surgeon discretion. This study seeks to determine if timing, acute versus delayed (>30 days) THA for the management of acetabular fracture impacts rate and indications for revision arthroplasty. Methods: Retrospective review identified 165 patients undergoing primary THA for an acetabular fracture at a Level I Academic Trauma Center from 1997 to 2020. Patients were stratified by performance of acute versus delayed (>30 days) THA. Charts were reviewed for rates and indications for revision arthroplasty. Statistical analyses were performed with α ≤ 0.05. Results: THA following acetabular fracture had an overall revision rate of 10.9 % (n=18), with an insignificantly increased rate associated with delayed THA (n=15, 13.0%) compared to acute THA (n=3, 6.0%). Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) was the most common indication for revision in delayed THA (n=9, 60.0%) and instability for acute THA (n=2, 66.7%). Patients undergoing acute THA had a higher rate of fracture dislocation (54.0% versus 25.2%, p=.0003) on presentation and increased mean age at time of injury (66.21 ± 10.38 vs 45.43 ± 15.41 years, p <0.0001) and arthroplasty (66.23 ± 10.8 vs 52.54 ± 12.73 years, p<0.0001). Conclusion: THA timing following acetabular fracture remains equivocal with an insignificant difference in revision rate between acute and delayed THA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40606709PMC12212342What 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.