ArticleBMC surgery2026
Disparities in disease presentation and survival after pathological fracture surgery at a middle- and a high-income centre.
Article in BMC surgery, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer prevalence is rapidly increasing in low- and middle-income countries, where late diagnosis and limited healthcare resources contribute to poor outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare presentation patterns and survival outcomes between Groote Schuur Hospital (South Africa) and Karolinska University Hospital (Sweden) to highlight disparities between high- and middle-income healthcare settings.
methodThis retrospective cohort study used data from the International Bone Metastasis Registry. Patients who underwent surgery for pathological fractures between 2018 and 2023 were included. The primary objective was to compare the proportion of patients presenting with malignancy not diagnosed prior to surgery between the two centres. Secondary outcomes included newly diagnosed malignancy within two months from surgery, indication for surgery, ECOG performance status, and survival.
resultsA total of 362 patients were included; 107 from Groote Schuur Hospital (GS) and 255 from Karolinska University Hospital (KS). GS had a higher proportion of patients with malignancy not diagnosed prior to surgery (13% vs 4%; p = 0.004) and newly diagnosed malignancy within two months (50% vs 25%; p < 0.001). GS patients were younger, more often female, and more frequently had breast cancer. They had fewer visceral metastases and better ECOG performance status. Prophylactic fixation was more common at GS, while surgical techniques were similar. No statistically significant difference in postoperative survival from surgery was detected between centres (p = 0.065); however, median postoperative survival was longer at GS (13 months) compared with KS (6 months), and the proportion of long-term survivors (> 2 years) was higher at GS (17% vs 3%; p < 0.001). Median overall survival from cancer diagnosis was longer at KS (247 months) compared with GS (43 months; p < 0.001).
conclusionsPatients at GS were more likely to present with previously undiagnosed or newly diagnosed malignancy, reflecting delayed detection and referral. They had better performance status, fewer visceral metastases, and more frequent prophylactic surgery. Despite similar surgical methods, postoperative survival did not differ significantly. These findings underscore the need for earlier cancer detection and improved access to systemic therapy in resource-limited settings.
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.