ArticleOsteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA2026
The phenotype of pelvic and acetabular fractures in adults aged 50 and older: a national database analysis in the Netherlands.
Article in Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA, 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
Brief Nationwide data show rising pelvic and acetabular fracture incidence, yet patient profiles and outcomes remain underexplored. In our cohort of 7,120 patients ≥50 years, pelvic fractures were frailer overall while mortality was similar to acetabular fracture patients. Findings support distinguishing fracture types and considering pelvic fractures as major osteoporotic fractures. PURPOSE: Pelvic and acetabular fractures are increasingly common in aging populations and carry substantial clinical and societal burdens. As these injuries are often grouped together despite potentially different patient characteristics and outcomes, this study aimed to provide a comprehensive, nationwide phenotypic description of patients aged 50 years and older with pelvic or acetabular fractures in the Netherlands.
methodsA retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted using national claims and population data from Statistics Netherlands (CBS). All individuals aged ≥50 years diagnosed with a pelvic or acetabular fracture in 2019 were included. Demographics, comorbidities, treatment modality, care utilization, 1-year readmission, and mortality were compared between fracture types and sex.
results7120 patients were included (6091 pelvic, 1029 acetabular). Pelvic fracture patients were older than acetabular fracture patients (mean age 77 vs 74), often female (79% vs 36%), with higher pre-injury rates of osteoporosis, connective tissue disease, and polypharmacy (all p < 0.05). Acetabular fractures showed more hospital admissions (53% vs 35%), surgical treatment (28% vs 4.4%), and complication-related readmission (9.7% vs 1.8%), most evident in male patients. New major fracture rates (6.6% vs 8.4%) and 1-year mortality rates (15% vs 17%) were comparable.
conclusionPelvic and acetabular fractures reflect distinct phenotypes in patients aged 50 and older, with pelvic fractures more closely linked to frailty and osteoporosis, most apparent in females. These findings support differentiating between fractures in research and clinical care and call for reconsideration of pelvic fractures within major osteoporotic fracture definitions, as their clinical profile seems similar to that of hip fracture patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42832039What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.