ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Delayed reduction of tile C pelvic ring injuries and evidence-based management strategies.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDelayed reduction of displaced pelvic ring fractures poses considerable surgical challenges. This study aimed to assess the reduction timing and effectiveness of various reduction strategies for delayed treatment of Tile C pelvic ring fractures. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween January 2020 and September 2023, 38 patients with Tile C type pelvic ring fractures, including 4 type C1, 16 type C2, and 18 type C3, underwent delayed reduction (more than a 10-day interval from injury to surgery) through different techniques, were retrospectively reviewed. Intraoperatively, closed reduction using Schanz pin traction or the Starr Frame-assisted Unlocking Closed Reduction Technique (UCRT) were preferred. If the above closed reduction fails, open reduction by using lumbo-iliac pedicle screw system was forced. The reduction quality was radiographically assessed according to Matta Pelvic Score. And the lower-extremity functionality was clinically evaluated by Majeed function score standard.
resultsThe 38 patients underwent a follow-up period ranging from 18 to 41 months. Closed reduction was successfully accomplished in 24 cases. Among these, two cases (type C1-1 and C1-2) achieved excellent reduction through the employment of Schanz pins technique. Additionally, 22 cases (comprising 2 of type C1-2, 16 of type C2, and 4 of type C3) that underwent UCRT resulted in excellent reduction for 11 patients, good reduction for 8 patients, and fair reduction for 3 patients. Following the failure of closed reduction, 14 patients with type C3 fractures underwent conversion to open reduction, and subsequently achieved excellent reduction. All patients achieved bony union (mean, 4.34 months). According to the average Majeed functional score, the lower-extremity functionality was deemed excellent in 2 patients using Schanz pins technique, 12 patients via UCRT and 9 patients by means of open reduction; good in 9 patients utilizing UCRT and 5 patients undergoing open reduction; and fair in 1 patient employing UCRT. In three cases, sensory nerve damage occurred, with a later complete recovery.
conclusionFor Tile type C pelvic fractures, early surgical intervention (within 10 days post-injury) may allow superior closed reduction outcomes. The Schanz pin technique appears well-suited for minimally displaced Tile C1-1/C1-2 pelvic fractures. The UCRT technique demonstrates favorable reduction outcomes in Tile C1/C2 fractures, whereas its effectiveness is comparatively limited in the management of C3 injuries. In such complex cases, particularly when UCRT fails, the ilio-lumbar pedicle screw technique offers a reliable alternative.
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.