ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Quantitative three-dimensional fracture mapping reveals subtype-specific morphology of acetabular roof column and wall fractures.
Article in Frontiers in 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
Introduction: Acetabular roof column and wall fractures (A3 injuries) are uncommon injuries involving the acetabular roof, but their subtype-specific three-dimensional morphology remains incompletely quantified. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study characterized the fracture-line distribution and geometric features of A3.1-A3.3 injuries using standardized CT-based three-dimensional reconstruction and fracture mapping. Among 3,248 patients with acetabular fractures screened at nine level-I trauma centers between January 2017 and December 2022, 89 had A3 injuries, and 46 surgically treated patients with adequate CT data were included. CT data were reconstructed in Mimics and processed in 3-Matic for fragment separation, virtual reduction, fracture-line tracing, surface-area measurement, displacement assessment, and angular analysis. Fracture trajectories were registered to a standardized left-sided hemipelvic template to generate subtype-specific fracture maps and an overall heat map. Results: A3.1 fractures showed shorter three-dimensional perifragment fracture-boundary length but greater fragment displacement and angular change, whereas A3.2 and A3.3 fractures demonstrated longer cranial trajectories and larger extra-fossa surface involvement. No statistically significant difference in intra-fossa surface area was detected among subtypes. Classification agreement was substantial, and quantitative measurements showed excellent reliability. Discussion: Quantitative three-dimensional mapping identified distinct morphologic patterns among A3 roof injuries. Rotational displacement of a localized roof fragment was a key morphology-based concern in A3.1 injuries, whereas A3.2 and A3.3 injuries showed broader cranial extension and greater extra-fossa involvement that may warrant further investigation in relation to fixation coverage and clinical outcomes. Because the cohort included only surgically treated patients with adequate CT data, these findings should be interpreted primarily in the context of more displaced or complex A3 injuries and may not be generalizable to minimally displaced or nonoperatively managed injuries.
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.