ArticleInternational orthopaedics2018
Validation of a new classification for periprosthetic shoulder fractures.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Biomechanical aspects in the treatment of periprosthetic humeral fractures].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Article
- Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty.EFORT open reviews · 2025Review
- The Treatment of Periprosthetic Fracture Revision of the Humerus with "Bamboo Support" Structural Allograft Technique-Atrophic Non-Union of a Post-Operative Periprosthetic Fracture after Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Case Report.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Non-operative management of humeral periprosthetic fracture after stemless shoulder arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
- Incidence of complications related to shoulder arthroplasties identified on computed tomography.Emergency radiology · 2023Article
- Inter-Observer and Intra-Observer Reliability Assessment of the Established Classification Systems for Periprosthetic Shoulder Fractures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Evaluation and treatment of postoperative periprosthetic humeral fragility fractures.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2023Review
- A narrative review of non-infected painful total shoulder arthroplasty: evaluation and treatment.Annals of joint · 2023Review
- Inadvertent, intraoperative, non- to minimally displaced periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures in RTSA do not affect the clinical and radiographic short-term outcome.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Is the Posterior Approach With Posterior locking compression plate and Anterior Allograft Useful and Safe in the Treatment of Periprosthetic Humeral Fractures Following Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty?Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2022Review
- PHILOS plating of periprosthetic humeral shaft fracture after onlay-type reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a case report.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2021Article
- A Long-Term Follow-Up of Post-Operative Periprosthetic Humeral Fracture in Shoulder Arthroplasty.Geriatric orthopaedic surgery & rehabilitation · 2021Article
- Failed Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty and Recommendations for Revision.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2020Review
- Post-operative periprosthetic humeral fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a review of the literature.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSuccessful treatment of periprosthetic shoulder fractures depends on the right strategy, starting with a well-structured classification of the fracture. Unfortunately, clinically relevant factors for treatment planning are missing in the pre-existing classifications. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to describe a new specific classification system for periprosthetic shoulder fractures including a structured treatment algorithm for this important fragility fracture issue.
methodsThe classification was established, focussing on five relevant items, naming the prosthesis type, the fracture localisation, the rotator cuff status, the anatomical fracture region and the stability of the implant. After considering each single item, the individual treatment concept can be assessed in one last step. To evaluate the introduced classification, a retrospective analysis of pre- and post-operative data of patients, treated with periprosthetic shoulder fractures, was conducted by two board certified trauma surgery consultants.
resultsThe data of 19 patients (8 male, 11 female) with a mean age of 74 ± five years have been analysed in our study. The suggested treatment algorithm was proven to be reliable, detected by good clinical outcome in 15 of 16 (94%) cases, where the suggested treatment was maintained. Only one case resulted in poor outcome due to post-operative wound infection and had to be revised.
conclusionsThe newly developed six-step classification is easy to utilise and extends the pre-existing classification systems in terms of clinically-relevant information. This classification should serve as a simple tool for the surgeon to consider the optimal treatment for his patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29353316What 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.