ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2026
Same location, different patients: a comparison of metastatic and conventional femoral neck fractures.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 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
backgroundAlthough conventional and metastatic femoral neck fractures (FNF) represent distinct patient populations in routine clinical practice, treatment management is generally similar for both groups. Systematic treatment approaches for FNF are currently used and supported by clinical guidelines; however, patients with metastatic FNF are generally managed according to treatment protocols developed for conventional FNF. The aim of this study was to determine whether the treatment strategy for conventional FNF is effective for patients with metastatic FNF.
methodsThis retrospective study included 185 patients diagnosed with conventional FNF and 71 patients with metastatic FNF who underwent endoprosthetic reconstruction at a nationwide tertiary orthopedic oncology center. The primary outcome measures were patient- and hospital-related factors potentially affecting survival in the two groups. Secondary outcomes included complications such as thrombotic events, decubitus ulcers, and erythrocyte transfusion requirements.
resultsPatients with metastatic FNF had significantly lower survival rates (p=0.021), higher rates of complications including thrombotic events (p=0.030) and decubitus ulcers (p=0.029), longer operative times (p<0.001), greater perioperative blood loss (p<0.001), and increased erythrocyte transfusion requirements (p<0.001). Compared with the conventional FNF group, metastatic FNF patients also had longer preoperative and postoperative hospital stays (p<0.001) and delayed postoperative mobilization (p=0.017).
conclusionAlthough treatment management for conventional femoral neck fractures has been standardized in orthopedic practice through established algorithms, these protocols do not adequately address the needs of patients with metastatic femoral neck fractures, who experience higher complication rates and lower survival.
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.