ArticleJSES international2024
Patient satisfaction after removal of locking plates in proximal humeral fractures - worth the surgery under functional and cosmetic aspects?
Article in JSES international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Locking plates are one of the most frequently used implants in surgical treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures. In spite of this established implant and a standardized approach, reduced shoulder function might remain a mid-to long-term issue, furthermore scars may influence patient satisfaction as a cosmetic issue. Indications for a second surgery to remove implant and/or scar revision are common questions in this context.The aim of the present study was to assess the benefit of a second surgery, including implant removal and scar revision surgery, on patients' satisfaction under functional and cosmetic aspects. Methods: Patients following displaced proximal humeral fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation with a locking plate osteosynthesis via a delto-pectoral approach following implant removal were included retrospectively. A follow-up took place anamnestically before the incident or the primary surgery [A], before second surgery [B], and after second surgery (scar revision/implant removal) [C]. Functional outcome (Constant Score (CS)) of both shoulders was obtained using a patient-reported outcome measure to evaluate the contralateral side as well as percentage CS (%CS). Furthermore, the cosmetic outcome was evaluated for color, contour, and size. Results: The clinical data of n = 81 patients with displaced proximal humeral fractures and the consecutive open reduction and internal fixation with a locking plate (51 women = 63.0% and 30 men = 37.0%; mean age: 53.7 ± 16.6 years) via a standardized deltopectoral approach could be included. The mean CS) before sustaining the humeral fracture or primary surgery [A] was anamnestically 85.8 ± 8.5 points and %CS 99.4 ± 8.4%. After open reduction and internal with a locking plate osteosynthesis [B], the mean CS was 72.2 ± 9.1 points and %CS 84.5 ± 8.7%. Following the scheduled implant removal and scar revision [C], the CS was 80 ± 13.1 points and %CS 92.3 ± 14.1%. After primary surgery, 26 patients (32.1%) complained about the scar because of color, contour, or size before the second surgery, and 23 patients (28.4%) afterwards. Conclusion: Implant removal after locking plate osteosynthesis in proximal humeral fractures via a delto-pectoral approach leads to an improved outcome both functionally and cosmetically. CS as well as scar situation and patients' overall satisfaction could be improved with a second surgery. Nevertheless, the need for a second surgery depends on the patients' functional and cosmetic demands.
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.