Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31361778›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Biomechanical behavior of three types of fixation in the two-part proximal humerus fracture without medial cortical support.

Paulo Ottoni di Tullio, Vincenzo Giordano, Eder Souto, Hugo Assed, João Paulo Chequer, William Belangero, José Ricardo L Mariolani, Hilton A Koch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Paulo Ottoni di TullioServiço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Vincenzo GiordanoServiço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-4429-312X
Eder SoutoServiço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Hugo AssedServiço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
João Paulo ChequerServiço de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Prof. Nova Monteiro, Hospital Municipal Miguel Couto, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
William BelangeroLaboratório de Biomateriais em Ortopedia, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
José Ricardo L MariolaniLaboratório de Biomateriais em Ortopedia, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Hilton A KochDepartamento de Radiologia, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Hospital Geral de Bonsucesso · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of a non-locking plate applied to the anteromedial surface of the proximal humerus on loads at the implant-bone interface of non-locking and locking lateral plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap.

methodsTwenty synthetic humeri models were used. In fifteen, the proximal portion of the humerus was osteotomized to create a two-part surgical neck fracture, with a 10-mm medial gap and a 5-mm lateral gap; five models were controls. In the osteotomized humeri, five models were stabilized with a locking lateral plate (group L), five with a locking lateral plate and an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T), and five with a non-locking lateral plate and a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T). All humeri were tested under axial loading until catastrophic failure, which was characterized as complete closure of the medial gap. Stiffness was calculated using force vs. displacement curves. The data were analyzed via descriptive and inferential studies, at a 5% significance level.

resultsStatistically significant differences were seen among all the constructions. The combination of a lateral locking plate with an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T) was the stiffest construction, while the combination of a non-locking lateral plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T) was the least stiff, even in comparison with a single locking lateral plate (p = 0.01). When the two groups which utilized a lateral locking plate (groups L+T and L) were compared, the group with additional anteromedial support demonstrated greater stiffness (p = 0.03), and stiffness values for the control group comprised of intact humeri models were even higher (p = 0.01).

conclusionCombining a lateral locking plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate provides a stiffer construction for fixation of unstable two-part proximal humerus fractures with a medial gap. Mechanical benefits of medial support with a second non-locking antero-medial plate seems to be related with better construct stability in terms of strength and fatigue, potentially reducing the risk of varus collapse of the humerus head and fracture healing disturbances.

Indexed as

Bone PlatesBiomechanical PhenomenaBone ScrewsCase-Control StudiesCortical BoneFracture Fixation, InternalHumansNeck InjuriesShoulder Fractures

Identifiers

PMID31361778
PMCPMC6667157
OpenAlexW2965984191

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.