[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"health-studies-list:{\"conditionNormalized\":\"acetabular-fracture\",\"overallStatus\":[\"RECRUITING\",\"AVAILABLE\",\"NOT_YET_RECRUITING\"],\"orderBy\":\"LastUpdateSubmitDate:desc\",\"size\":25,\"offset\":0}":3,"health-study-condition:acetabular-fracture":26},{"pageToken":4,"total":5,"offset":6,"count":5,"results":7},null,4,0,[8,45,69,92],{"id":9,"slug":10,"hasResults":11,"nctId":12,"briefTitle":13,"officialTitle":14,"acronym":15,"eligibilityCriteria":16,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":19,"targetDuration":22,"studyType":23,"phases":4,"briefSummary":24,"conditions":25,"keywords":27,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":33,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":34,"startDateStruct":37,"completionDateStruct":39,"leadSponsor":41,"locationsCount":44},"100340541","geriatric-acetabular-fractures-open-reduction-internal-fixation-versus-replacement-100340541",false,"NCT03713853","Geriatric Acetabular fracTures: Open Reduction Internal Fixation Versus Replacement","GATOR: Geriatric Acetabular fracTures: Open Reduction Internal Fixation Versus Replacement - A Large Cohort of Acute Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) Versus Total Hip Arthroplasty for Geriatric Acetabular Fractures","GATOR","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* 60 years of age or older\n* Isolated and Displaced (more or equal to 2mm on any radiographic view) fracture of the acetabulum\n* Patient requires surgical treatment, either THA+ORIF or ORIF surgeries\n* Fracture is acute (within 3 weeks of injury)\n* Patient was ambulatory (with or without walking aids) prior to their acetabular fracture injury\n* Patient is able to provide informed consent to participation in the study\n* Patient is able to read and understand English\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Presence of an active or chronic infection around the fracture (soft tissue or bone)\n* Open\u002Fcompound fracture\n* Bilateral acetabular fractures\n* Pathological fracture excluding osteoporosis\n* Periprosthetic fracture (previous arthroplasty or hardware or ORIF in-situ). Hardware (screws or plates or nails or hemi-arthroplasty) on the femoral side are not excluded.\n* Medical or surgical contraindication to surgery\n* Dementia","ALL","60 Years",{"count":20,"type":21},104,"ESTIMATED","24 Months","OBSERVATIONAL","Management of acetabular (hip) fractures in the geriatric population can be very challenging because of pre-existing medical comorbidities, pre-existing osteoporosis and increased risk of mortality.\n\nThe two most common treatment options for acetabular fractures are either surgical fixation using plates and screws to hold the fractured pieces in the correct position until the fracture has healed or surgical fixation in addition to a total hip replacement.\n\nSurgical fixation requires prolonged immobilization of the affected limb (typically around 6-12 weeks post-operatively), which can lead to disability and other complications. Such patients, especially those who are frail and cognitively impaired, are unable to adhere to the immobilization restrictions, leading to an increased risk of fixation failure.\n\nPatients who underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of an acetabular fracture were reported to have about 25 times greater incidence of hip replacement compared with general population matched controls.\n\nAdditionally, performing a subsequent hip replacement after a previous surgical fixation (ORIF) of an acetabular fracture, especially in the elderly population, can present a number of technical difficulties including; difficult dissection due to previous incision(s) and scarring, dealing with retained hardware, bony deficiency and the possibility of infected hardware.\n\nThe aim of the study is to perform a large cohort study to assess pain and physical function in patients 60 years and older who have sustained an acetabular fracture.",[26],"Acetabular Fracture",[28,29,30,31],"Total hip replacement","Total hip arthroplasty","Open Reduction internal Fixation","Hip fixation","RECRUITING","2026-06-10",{"date":35,"type":36},"2026-06-12","ACTUAL",{"date":38,"type":21},"2026-12",{"date":40,"type":21},"2030-12",{"name":42,"class":43},"Unity Health Toronto","OTHER",1,{"id":46,"slug":47,"hasResults":11,"nctId":48,"briefTitle":49,"officialTitle":50,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":51,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":52,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":53,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":56,"briefSummary":58,"conditions":59,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":60,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":61,"startDateStruct":63,"completionDateStruct":65,"leadSponsor":67,"locationsCount":44},"100547560","rim-plate-to-buttress-plate-for-posterior-wall-acetabular-fractures-with-and-without-inter-fragmentary-screws-100547560","NCT06409559","Rim Plate to Buttress Plate for Posterior Wall Acetabular Fractures With and Without Inter-fragmentary Screws","A Randomized Prospective Study Comparing Rim Plate to Buttress Plate for Posterior Wall Acetabular Fractures With and Without Inter-fragmentary Screws","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Skeletally mature males and females, ≥ 18 years old and with age less than 65 years.\n2. Fracture of the acetabular posterior wall fracture due to acute traumatic hip dislocation, confirmed with anteroposterior pelvic or hip radiographs, and CT scan\n3. Operative fixation of fractures within 14 days of presenting to the emergency room.\n4. Patient was ambulatory prior to fracture, with or without walking aids\n5. Medically optimized for operative intervention\n6. Provision of informed consent by patient or legal guardian.\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n1. Patients not suitable for internal fixation (severe osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, or pathologic fracture).\n2. Pre-existing orthopedic fixation, implant, or prosthesis around the affected acetabulum.\n3. Patients with metabolic bone disease including diagnosis of osteoporosis.\n4. Patients with bony or soft tissue infections around the acetabulum.\n5. Patients unable to provide informed consent.\n6. Patients having other fractures of Pelvis or acetabulum other than an isolated posterior acetabular wall fracture.\n7. Patients with previous history of acetabular fracture (operative or nonoperative)\n8. Patients with previous history of hip pathology such as avascular necrosis, hip dysplasia, Legg-Calve Perthes Disease, or advanced degenerative arthritis.","18 Years",{"count":54,"type":21},60,"INTERVENTIONAL",[57],"NA","The hypothesis of this study is that the Rim Plate method utilizing interfragmentary screws placed through the plate will result in superior fixation, a lower rate of loss of reduction of the fracture fragment, better anatomic healing of the articular (joint) surface, a decreased rate of early post-traumatic arthritic changes of the joint (cartilage) surface, and improved functional outcomes.",[26],"2026-04-28",{"date":62,"type":36},"2026-05-04",{"date":64,"type":36},"2023-08-01",{"date":66,"type":21},"2028-03",{"name":68,"class":43},"University of Cincinnati",{"id":70,"slug":71,"hasResults":11,"nctId":72,"briefTitle":73,"officialTitle":74,"acronym":75,"eligibilityCriteria":76,"healthyVolunteers":11,"sex":17,"minAge":52,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":77,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":23,"phases":4,"briefSummary":79,"conditions":80,"keywords":4,"overallStatus":32,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":83,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":84,"startDateStruct":86,"completionDateStruct":88,"leadSponsor":90,"locationsCount":44},"100409716","pelvic-and-acetabular-fracture-a-prospective-observational-study-100409716","NCT04615104","Pelvic and Acetabular Fracture: A Prospective Observational Study","Functional, Clinical, and Performance Outcomes Following Pelvic and Acetabular Fracture: A Prospective Observational Study","PACE","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Fracture of the pelvic ring\n* Fracture of the acetabulum\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Patients unwilling to provide consent to participate.",{"count":78,"type":21},200,"The purpose of this study is to understand the trajectory of function and self-reported outcomes of patients following pelvic and acetabular, treated both operatively and nonoperatively.",[81,26,82],"Pelvic Fracture","Pubic Rami Fracture","2025-11-20",{"date":85,"type":36},"2025-11-21",{"date":87,"type":36},"2020-01-01",{"date":89,"type":21},"2029-12",{"name":91,"class":43},"Wake Forest University Health Sciences",{"id":93,"slug":94,"hasResults":11,"nctId":95,"briefTitle":96,"officialTitle":97,"acronym":4,"eligibilityCriteria":98,"healthyVolunteers":99,"sex":17,"minAge":18,"maxAge":4,"enrollmentInfo":100,"targetDuration":4,"studyType":55,"phases":102,"briefSummary":103,"conditions":104,"keywords":105,"overallStatus":109,"whyStopped":4,"lastUpdateSubmitDate":110,"lastUpdatePostDateStruct":111,"startDateStruct":113,"completionDateStruct":115,"leadSponsor":117,"locationsCount":44},"100418138","weight-bearing-of-surgically-treated-acetabular-fractures-100418138","NCT04724811","Weight-bearing of Surgically Treated Acetabular Fractures.","Weight-bearing of Surgically Treated Acetabular Fractures. A Randomised Controlled Trial","Inclusion Criteria:\n\n* Unilateral dislocated acetabulum fracture (displacement of over 2mm in preoperative CT scan)\n* The osteosynthesis is performed during 21 days after initial trauma\n* The patient is willing to participate in the follow-up\n\nExclusion Criteria:\n\n* Unwillingness to participate in randomisation\n* Bilateral fracture\n* Letournel \\& Judet type Both column or Posterior column and wall fractures\n* Any other injury that prevents the patient from partial weight bearing\n* Open fracture of the acetabulum\n* Pathologic fracture (fragility fractures are not an exclusion criteria)\n* Prior functional disability in the pelvis or lower extremity\n* Non-Compliance due to dementia or other mental disability\n* Prior daily pain medication due to hip-pain\n* Unwillingness to accept one of the two mobilisation protocols\n* Prior hip replacement on injured side\n* BMI \\> 40",true,{"count":101,"type":21},50,[57],"The purpose of this study is to determine whether patients with operatively treated acetabular fractures benefit from early weight-bearing as tolerated. The study compares two groups ( n = 25 each), which are randomised into either weight-bearing as tolerated or touch-down weight-bearing for 6-8 weeks postoperatively.\n\nBoth study groups are stratified according to\n\n* Type of fracture (anterior approach vs anterior + additional posterior approach)\n* Dislocated dome vs non-dislocated\u002F non existing separate dome fragment\n\nPatients, who are eligible to participate in the trial but choose not to participate in randomisation are asked to enrol in a prospective cohort follow-up cohort. This is to examine a potential participation bias in the RCT groups. These patients will not be counted into the target amount of 50 RCT patients.",[26],[106,107,108],"Acetabulum","Periarticular fracture","Weight-bearing","NOT_YET_RECRUITING","2024-03-05",{"date":112,"type":36},"2024-03-06",{"date":114,"type":21},"2024-05",{"date":116,"type":21},"2027-12",{"name":118,"class":43},"Hospital District of Helsinki and Uusimaa"]