Smaller cuts, better recovery? study compares pelvic fracture surgeries
NCT ID NCT07534579
First seen Jun 27, 2026 · Last updated Jun 27, 2026
Summary
This study looks back at medical records of 60 adults who had surgery for severe pelvic fractures. It compares the standard open surgery (large cut) with a newer minimally invasive method (small cuts) to see which leads to better healing, fewer complications, and faster return to work. The goal is to help surgeons choose the best approach for each patient.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Participants
-
About 60 people
The number the study aims to enrol. It can still change while the study runs.
- Expected to start
-
May 2026
An estimate. Start dates often move.
- Expected to finish
-
Jun 2027
An estimate. End dates often move.
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
Who is studied
The study population consists of adult patients ($\\ge$ 18 years) treated at the Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology at Assiut University. Patients must have a confirmed diagnosis of a traumatic, unstable sacral fracture (including Denis Zones I-III with instability, spinopelvic dissociation, or AO/OTA Type C injuries). All included subjects were operated on using either open or minimally invasive lumbopelvic fixation between January 2016 and December 2024. Furthermore, participants must have adequate medical records with a minimum of 12 months of postoperative clinical follow-up.
- Ages
-
18 years and older
- Sex
-
Anyone
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Adult patients aged 18 years or older at the time of injury and surgery. * Confirmed diagnosis of a traumatic, unstable sacral fracture, including: Denis Zone I, II, or III fractures with instability; Spinopelvic dissociation (U-type / H-type sacral fractures); AO/OTA Type C pelvic ring injuries involving the sacrum. * Operated on using lumbopelvic fixation (open or minimally invasive technique) within the study period (2016-2024). * Availability of adequate and complete medical records, including: Preoperative and postoperative imaging (X-ray and/or CT scan), and operative notes and surgical logs. * Minimum clinical follow-up of 12 months postoperatively. Exclusion Criteria: * Pathological fractures (e.g., fractures secondary to primary or metastatic malignancy, osteoporotic insufficiency fractures). * Patients managed conservatively or with alternative fixation strategies that do not include lumbopelvic instrumentation (e.g., isolated iliosacral screw fixation, anterior ring fixation alone). * Severe polytrauma resulting in in-hospital mortality prior to the minimum required follow-up period. * History of previous pelvic, sacral, or lumbosacral spine surgery prior to the index trauma. * Incomplete medical records or inadequate radiological follow-up data preventing accurate assessment of outcomes. * Patients with pre-existing neuromuscular disorders or spinal pathology that would confound neurological or functional outcome assessment. * Pregnant patients at the time of injury
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Pelvic ring injuries are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
How to take part
Only the study team decides who joins. These are the ways to reach them.
-
The official record
The full official record for this study. This one lists no contact details, but it is the first place any would appear.
-
A doctor treating you
A doctor who knows your case can contact a study site on your behalf, and can tell you whether this study is worth pursuing at all.
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.