ArticleCureus2024
The Operative Management of Capitellum Fractures.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Capitellum fractures represent fewer than 1% of elbow fractures. Most commonly, these fractures occur secondary to either axial loading with the elbow fully extended or direct impact to the lateral aspect of the elbow. Numerous classification systems exist, with many types and subtypes. Since capitellum fractures are uncommon and fracture type varies widely, there is a lack of consensus with regard to treatment recommendations. We present a case series of seven patients with capitellum fractures, who presented between January 2016 and August 2020 to Addenbrooke's Hospital (Cambridge, the United Kingdom). All patients were female, with an average age of 33 years. In each case, the affected elbow joint was immobilised using a backslab before open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) was performed. Joint mobility was recorded both on the day of the injury and at clinic review postoperatively (first at two weeks and then at between four and eight weeks). The Oxford Elbow Score (OES) was measured retrospectively, relating to (1) before the injury and (2) six months after fracture reduction. ORIF was associated with a near-full return of pronation and supination by eight weeks, with flexion-extension also improving significantly. The Oxford Elbow Score at six months reached 82.0% of pre-injury scores. Overall, our results suggest that ORIF is a well-tolerated and effective treatment strategy for capitellum fractures. Future studies with a greater sample size are required to assess the outcomes across a longer period, to determine whether outcomes are maintained and continue to improve.
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.