Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35073516›Full record

ReviewEFORT open reviews2022

Complications in humeral shaft fractures - non-union, iatrogenic radial nerve palsy, and postoperative infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Maria Anna Smolle, Sandra Bösmüller, Paul Puchwein, Martin Ornig, Andreas Leithner, Franz-Josef Seibert

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EFORT open reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Treatment of infected humeral shaft nonunion and presumed aseptic nonunion with positive intraoperative cultures: a retrospective single-center study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Preoperative estimation of humerus intramedullary nail length using clinical landmarks.Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maria Anna SmolleDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Sandra BösmüllerAUVA Trauma Centre Vienna Meidling, Vienna, Austria.
Paul PuchweinDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Martin OrnigDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Andreas LeithnerDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2598-2325
Franz-Josef SeibertDepartment of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Medical University of Graz · ATUnfallkrankenhaus Meidling · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess risk for iatrogenic radial nerve palsy (iRNP), non-union, and post-operative infection in humeral shaft fractures. A PubMed search including original articles comparing different treatments for humeral shaft fractures published since January 2000 was performed. Random effect models with relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs were calculated for treatment groups and outcomes. Of the 841 results, 43 studies were included in the meta-analysis (11 level II, 5 level III, 27 level IV). Twenty-seven compared intramedullary nailing (IM) with ORIF, nine conservative with operative treatment, four ORIF with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), and three anterior/anterolateral with posterior approach. iRNP risk was higher for ORIF vs IM (18 studies; RR: 1.80; P = 0.047), ORIF vs MIPO (4 studies; RR: 5.60; P = 0.011), and posterior vs anterior/anterolateral approach (3 studies; RR: 2.68; P = 0.005). Non-union risk was lower for operative vs conservative therapy (six studies; RR: 0.37; P < 0.001), but not significantly different between ORIF and IM (21 studies; RR: 1.00; P = 0.997), or approaches (two studies; RR: 0.36; P = 0.369). Post-operative infection risk was higher for ORIF vs IM (14 studies; RR: 1.84; P = 0.004) but not different between approaches (2 studies; RR: 0.95; P = 0.960). Surgery appears to be the method of choice when aiming to secure bony union, albeit risk for iRNP has to be considered, particularly in case of ORIF vs IM or MIPO, and posterior approach. Due to the limited number of randomised studies, evidence on the best treatment option remains moderate, though.

Indexed as

humeral shaft fracutrepostoperative complicationstreatment

Identifiers

PMID35073516
PMCPMC8788154
OpenAlexW4205263800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.