ArticleIndian journal of orthopaedics2025
Treatment of Extra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures: Current Concepts and Systematic Review.
Article in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute extra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHFs) continue to pose a treatment challenge for many orthopedic surgeons. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of treatment principles, while reporting union rates, time to union, complication rates, and outcome measures following operative and non-operative management. Methods: A systematic review was conducted utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting clinical or functional outcomes following treatment for acute DHFs in patients > 17 years of age with a mean follow-up of 6 months or greater were included. Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria was used to assess risk of bias. Results: A total of twenty articles were included with 754 fractures. The union rates after operative management were 97% (95% CI: 93-99%) compared to 99% (95% CI: 85-100%) after non-operative management. The most common patient reported outcome for operative studies was Mayo Elbow Performance Score (range 65-100). Range-of-motion (ROM) was the most common reported outcome in the non-operative studies. Complications rates after operative management were 13% (95% CI: 8-20%) compared to 8% (95% CI: 2-32%) in patients treated conservatively. Conclusions: This systematic review is among the largest studies reporting on union rates, complication rates, and functional outcomes of acute extra-articular DHFs following operative and non-operative management. There is a need for up-to-date and high-quality comparative studies to establish a definitive gold standard treatment based on patient profiles and management goals. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
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.