ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2026
Proximal femoral replacement for oncologic and non-oncologic indications: a retrospective study over a 13-year period.
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProximal femoral replacement (PFR) is a critical limb-salvage strategy for managing massive proximal femoral bone loss due to oncologic and non-oncologic conditions. Although oncologic outcomes are well described, evidence surrounding PFR for infection, periprosthetic fracture, and mechanical failure remains limited. This study evaluates short- to mid-term outcomes following PFR for multiple indications and compares primary with revision procedures.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing PFR at a Level I trauma center from 2009 to 2023. Cases were categorized by procedure type (primary vs. revision) and indication (tumor, infection, other causes). Outcomes included operative time, complications according to the Henderson classification, reoperation rates, and functional outcomes.
resultsA total of 81 patients (84 procedures) were included with a median follow-up of 7 months (IQR 0–31); 57.1% were lost to follow-up. The overall complication rate was 42.9%, significantly higher in revision procedures than in primary PFRs. Infection (Henderson Type IV) was the most frequent complication and occurred predominantly in revision surgeries. No cases of aseptic loosening (Type II) were identified. Reoperation was required in 29% of all procedures, with the highest rates observed in infection cases.
conclusionsPFR remains a reliable limb-salvage option for extensive proximal femoral deficiency. Revision procedures, especially infection-related cases, carry substantially higher risks of complications and reoperation. In contrast, primary oncologic PFRs showed comparatively favorable outcomes. Infection remains the principal barrier to durable results, underscoring the need for optimized perioperative strategies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III (retrospective cohort study).
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.