ReviewUnfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2026
[Interprosthetic femoral fractures : Osteosynthesis, megaendoprosthesis, limb salvage?]
Review in Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interprosthetic femoral fractures (IFF) involve fractures occurring between total hip and knee arthroplasty and represent an increasing challenge, with complication rates of up to 57% and a mortality rate of 31%. The treatment is complex and requires an individual, often multidisciplinary approach. Risk factors are related to the patient, implant and surgical technique. Classification systems, such as the one proposed by Pires enable a systematic categorization based on fracture location and morphological features of the fracture. The treatment options range from angular stable plate osteosynthesis, double plate fixation and nail-plate combinations to endoprosthetic solutions, such as stem revision, proximal or distal femur replacement or total femur replacement (TFR). As an alternative to TFR, sleeves can be used providing a bone-sparing solution. Endoprosthetic procedures are primarily indicated for loose prostheses and poor bone quality but carry a higher risk of complications. The choice of treatment depends on many factors, especially fracture type, prosthesis fixation and bone vitality. The goal is always an early functional, loadbearing reconstruction to prevent secondary complications. Preventively, attention should be paid to the biomechanically adapted and stable treatment of the primary arthroplasty. Ultimately, IFFs require detailed planning and expertise in both osteosynthetic and endoprosthetic treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41065816What 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.