ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2025
Retrospective comparative study between conservative management and surgical fixation of pelvic insufficiency fractures.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Pelvic insufficiency fractures (PIFs) are commonly underdiagnosed and delays in treatment can lead to complications including impaired mobility. This study compared outcomes between conservative treatment and surgical fixation in patients with PIFs. Methods: A retrospective study of 19 patients with pelvic fractures between July 2023 and February 2024 was performed. Patients with isolated sacral and pelvic insufficiency fractures with no concomitant fracture that requires rehabilitation were included. Xray and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) images, and patient demographic data was collected. Primary study endpoints included the relative change in patient ambulation status from pre-injury to discharge. Patients were followed up outpatient 6 weeks and 3 months after discharge. Results: Surgical fixation was performed in 7 patients at an average of 10.1 days after injury (range 4-18 days). Mean duration of diagnosis was 2.74 days. Mean duration of diagnosis among patients requiring an MRI was 4.75 days. Length of inpatient stay in the non-operative and operative groups was 32.1 and 39.8 days respectively. Non-operative patients ambulated 3.5 days after admission with minimal pain. In the operative group, patients underwent a trial of conservative therapy for an average of 6 days (range 3-9 days) before deciding for surgical fixation. Patients were ambulatory 1 day post-fixation on average. There was no significant difference in ambulatory status between both groups at discharge. Conclusion: Awareness of the sequelae of PIFs is required among clinicians and patients. Surgical intervention is a potentially effective treatment option for patients with unstable PIF and severe pain, as it can provide more rapid relief of symptoms and faster recovery. More robust protocols should be developed for PIF treatment to improve patient outcomes. More studies are required to determine the best framework for the management of PIFs to guide optimal care and outcomes.
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.