ReviewTrauma surgery & acute care open2026
Advances and uncertainties in fat embolism syndrome: a review.
Review in Trauma surgery & acute care open, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fat embolism syndrome (FES) is a complex and potentially life-threatening condition resulting from fat particles entering the circulation, leading to embolic and inflammatory injury across multiple organs, particularly the lungs, brain, and skin. Although the classical triad of respiratory distress, neurological dysfunction, and petechial rash was first described decades ago, clinical presentation remains heterogeneous and often non-specific, complicating timely diagnosis. Existing criteria (Gurd, Wilson, and Lindeque) lack robust validation and remain inadequate in current practice. Imaging modalities, particularly chest CT and brain MRI, alongside emerging biomarkers, such as interleukin-6, might improve diagnostic accuracy, though specificity remains limited. FES management is primarily supportive, focusing on maintaining oxygenation and hemodynamic stability, with invasive ventilation or extracorporeal support required in severe cases. Early fracture stabilization within 24 hours remains the most effective preventive strategy, whereas the use of corticosteroids is controversial owing to inconsistent efficacy and potential adverse effects. In this review, we aim to summarize current understanding of the diagnosis, management, and prevention of FES, while identifying unresolved clinical and research challenges. Relevant literature was identified through PubMed and Scopus searches of English language articles on traumatic and non-traumatic FES published up to 2025. Despite extensive clinical observation, many uncertainties persist regarding the pathophysiology, risk stratification, and optimal treatment of FES. Future directions include refinement of diagnostic criteria through integration of imaging, biomarkers, and artificial intelligence, as well as multicenter studies to establish evidence-based management strategies.
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.