ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Does the order matter? Comparing the order of stem placement and fracture reduction in revision total hip arthroplasty for Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femur fractures.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femur fractures (PPFF) have posed significant treatment challenges due to stem instability and lack of adequate femoral bone stock. This study investigated subsidence, survivorship, and outcomes of Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures, based on the order in which revision stem placement and fracture reduction occurred during revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA).
methodsThis retrospective, cohort study included 46 rTHAs between June 2011 and April 2023. Included patients underwent rTHA for Vancouver B2 or B3 PPFF with minimum one-year radiographic and two-year clinical follow-up. All patients were treated with diaphyseal-engaging tapered fluted titanium stems and stem modularity decisions were based on surgeon preference. Cohorts were separated based on if stem placement (SF, n = 19), or fracture reduction (RF, n = 27) occurred first. Patient demographics, intraoperative information, and clinical and radiographic outcomes were collected.
resultsThe SF and RF cohort showed no statistically significant differences in rate of subsidence ≥5 mm [26.3%[SF], 22.2%[RF], P = 0.749), rate of subsidence ≥ 10 mm (15.8%[SF], 14.8%[RF], P = 0.928), nor average subsidence (4.1 mm[SF], 4.4 mm[RF], P = 0.861). We found no statistically significant differences in surgery-related clinical outcomes or all-cause revision rates within a two-year follow-up period. The groups demonstrated comparable rates of procedure-related 90-day emergency department visits(P = 0.370) and readmissions(P = 0.712). The SF group underwent four revisions for three PJIs and one acetabular component aseptic loosening. The RF cohort underwent four revisions for one acetabular component aseptic loosening, one dislocation, one PPFF, and one PJI. Rates of all-cause revision were comparable(P = 0.583). There was one case within the RF cohort to explant the trochanteric plate with no revision of arthroplasty components.
conclusionsThe present analysis suggests the order in which intraoperative femoral stem implantation and fracture reduction occurs does not affect short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes. This intraoperative decision should be based upon patient anatomy, fracture patterns, and surgeon discretion.
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.