ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2023
Minimum 2-year results of the second-generation CFR-PEEK locking plate on the proximal humeral fracture.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison between CFR-PEEK and titanium plate for proximal humeral fracture: A meta-analysis.Joint diseases and related surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Carbon-fibre plates for traumatic and (impending) pathological fracture fixation: Where do we stand? A systematic review.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2023Pooled it
- Implant-dependent behavior of tunnel widening and clavicular button migration after arthroscopic-assisted treatment of acromioclavicular joint instabilities.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to analyse and compare the 24-month range of motion results of patients treated with CFR-PEEK2 versus conventional titanium plate osteosyntheses (TAL-P). We hypothesized similar clinical outcomes but a better range of motion in the CFR-PEEK2 group than the TAL-P group in the 2-year follow-up.
methodsThis retrospective study analysing prospectively collected data included all patients that presented with a PHF and were treated with CFR-PEEK2 between November 2016 and April 2018. Follow-up was performed after a minimum of 24 months, evaluating the functional degree of movement functional scores, including the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) as well as an age- and sex-adapted Constant-Murley score (CMS). The 2-year results were compared to the results of a matched pair group comprising patients that were treated with TAL-P during the same period.
resultsOf the 35 patients included (mean age: 61.2 [18-78] years), 30 (86%) patients completed the 24-month follow-up in the CFR-PEEK2-group. After 24 months, the mean CMS was 89.9 points (pt) (44.5-100 pt) and the mean SSV was 86.7% (35-100%). Compared to the matched-pair TAL-P cohort, the 24-month follow-up showed similar results (CMS: 88.6 pt. (40.5-100 pt.) [p = 0.9]; SSV: 76% (30-100%) [p = 0.05]). However, significantly better degrees of forward flexion and internal rotation as well as a better range of motion in abduction was recorded in patients treated with CFR-PEEK2 plates than TAL-P.
conclusionAt the 24-month follow-up, patients who received treatment with CFR-PEEK2 compared to those that received TAL-P showed enhanced range of motion whilst having similar clinical scores.
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.