ArticleShoulder & elbow2025
Hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty for unreconstructible distal humeral fractures in the elderly (hot elbow): A feasibility study.
Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04646798 (Hemiarthroplasty Or Total Elbow Arthroplasty for Unreconstructible Distal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly), which is not on this 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.
Hemiarthroplasty Or Total Elbow Arthroplasty for Unreconstructible Distal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly (HoT Elbow): a Feasibility Study
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This feasibility trial aims to assess the practicality of, and obtain preliminary data to inform, a definitive randomised controlled trial (RCT) of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) versus distal humeral hemiarthroplasty (HA) in patients over the age of 65 years with unreconstructible distal humeral fractures (DHF). 17 patients met the inclusion criteria during the 18-month recruitment period from December 2020 until June 2022, and 15 (88%) consented to be randomised (recruitment rate: 0.7/month). Two patients withdrew from the study prior to surgery leaving 13 patients for analysis (retention rate: 87%). Seven patients were randomised to TEA and six patients to HA. 100% of patients were available for 12-month follow-up. A 10-point difference in favour of HA in DASH (44.5 vs. 54.2) and OES (31.6 vs. 21.3) was seen during 6-week follow-up, while no difference in patient-reported outcome measures was seen at 3- or 12-month follow-up. This study demonstrates feasibility of undertaking an RCT of TEA versus HA in patients over the age of 65 with unreconstructible DHF. Preliminary data corroborate with the ongoing clinical equipoise and support the requirement for a larger adequately powered RCT. This trial is registered in the US Clinical Trials Registry (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04646798?cond=distal%20humeral%20fracture&rank=6) Clinical Trial ID: NCT04646798.
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.