ArticleCureus2024
Distal Humerus Physeal Separation: Diagnostic Challenges and Implications.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic Pitfalls and Management of Transphyseal Fractures of the Distal Humerus: A Retrospective Review of 25 Cases.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Treatment Strategies for Traumatic Distal Humerus Physeal Separation in Children: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
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
Distal humerus physeal separation is an uncommon and often misdiagnosed injury in infants and young children, frequently resulting in delayed treatment. We report three cases of distal humerus physeal separation that presented with different clinical scenarios with different management approaches. The first case describes a nine-month-old girl who was initially treated for presumed elbow cellulitis before presentation to our centre six weeks later. Conservative management, with further observation, noted remodelling of the distal humerus and full elbow range of motion (ROM) after 18 months. The second case involves a two-year-old girl with Kawasaki disease who underwent delayed closed reduction and percutaneous pinning after one week due to concurrent antiplatelet therapy. At four-month follow-up, there was cubitus varus deformity with slight limitation in elbow flexion. The third case is of a five-day-old male neonate with a right elbow deformity following an elective caesarean delivery at another hospital. Gentle manipulation was performed with a splint to improve alignment and immobilisation. The fracture united after five weeks. There was varus deformity but otherwise a full range of motion. These cases underscore the challenges in early diagnosis and management of distal humerus physeal separation in young children. Delayed treatment can lead to favourable outcomes, but follow-up is essential to observe for potential remodelling and residual deformity.
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.