ArticleMusculoskeletal surgery2023
Mason type III fractures of the radial head: ORIF, resection or prosthetic replacement?
Article in Musculoskeletal surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient-reported outcomes after surgery for isolated radial head fractures: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Mid-term clinical results of anatomic low-profile locking plates in the treatment of radial head fractures: a consecutive series of 57 patients.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Temporary Cemented Spacer for Complex Radial Head Fractures: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
- Radial head arthroplasty: A pillar of stability in complex elbow fractures.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Article
- Clinical and functional outcomes of plate and screw osteosynthesis in mason type III and IV radial head fractures in the absence of a radial head prosthesis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Comminuted Mason III/IV Radial Head Fractures: What Is the Best Treatment Between Prosthesis and Radial Head Resection? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Management of Elderly Elbow Fractures.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- The clinical outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation for Mason-Johnston type IV fractures of the radial head.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Functional Outcomes of Radial Head Fractures Treated With Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF).Cureus · 2024Article
- Monobloc vs. Modular Radial-Head Arthroplasty for Complex Elbow Trauma: Long-Term Follow-Up and Comparative Evaluation.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Type of fixation is not associated with range of motion after operative treatment of proximal radius fractures- a systematic review of 519 patients.JSES international · 2024Review
- Functional Postoperative Outcome for 92 Cases of Radial Head Fractures: A PROM-Based Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Clinical and radiological outcome of Mason-Johnston types III and IV radial head fractures treated by an on-table reconstruction.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022Article
- Radial head arthroplasty vs. open reduction and internal fixation for the treatment of terrible triad injury of the elbow: A systematic review and meta-analysis update.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study focused on a comparison of mid-term clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes of adults treated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), radial head prosthesis (RHP) and resection (RHR).
methodsThe retrospective evaluation concerned 47 surgically treated patients after a mean follow-up of 53 months. All patients were grouped according to the surgical procedure performed: 15 in the RHP group, 16 in the ORIF group and 16 in the RHR group. At the follow-up, outcome assessment was based on radiographs, range of motion (ROM) and functional rating scores.
resultsPatients treated by RHR had significantly higher mean age and shorter operation time than other two groups. Compared to ROM, flexion, extension and pronation were significantly worse in patients treated by ORIF than those in the RHP group and the RHR group. Supination was significantly better in the RHP group. However, no statistical differences were observed in functional rating scores among the three groups. Regarding complications, instability was the only cause of revision surgery in the RHP group and the RHR group. On the other hand, the ORIF group revision rate was 50% and secondary displacement was the most frequent cause of failure.
conclusionThe ORIF group did not show good results with greater elbow stiffness and higher revision rate than the other two techniques. RHR may be suitable for elderly patients with lower functional demands as it reported good clinical results and reduced operation time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.