ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Outcomes of intramedullary nailing versus plate fixation for humeral shaft fractures: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. 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.
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
backgroundHumeral shaft fractures account for 1-3% of all bone fractures. Conservative treatment often leads to complications such as non-union and shoulder stiffness. Surgical fixation with a dynamic compression plate (DCP) has been the gold standard treatment. Intramedullary nailing (IMN) has recently gained popularity due to its minimally invasive approach and reduced risk of radial nerve injury. This study aims to compare the outcomes of IMN and plate fixation for humeral shaft fractures.
methodsThis retrospective study included patients with humeral shaft fractures treated with either IMN or DCP fixation at Hamad General Hospital between April 2015 and October 2018. Patient demographics, fracture characteristics, surgical outcomes, and complications were collected. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient information, and univariate analysis was conducted to compare both groups. A Cox proportional hazards model, adjusted for age, gender, and polytrauma status was applied to compare time to union between IMN and DCP groups.
resultsSixty five patients (25 IMN, 40 plate fixation) were included. Non-union rates were higher in the DCP group than in the IMN group (13% vs. 4%). Reoperation rates were also higher in the DCP group (20% vs. 4%). Postoperative neuropathy rates were 4% for IMN and 10% for DCP, with neuropathy resolution significantly higher in the IMN group (92% vs. 68%). Shoulder range of motion (ROM) and pain favored the DCP group, with 98% unaffected ROM in the plate group compared to 76% in the IMN group (p = 0.007), and a lower incidence of shoulder pain (28% vs. 98%, p < 0.001). Time to union was comparable between both groups, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.08 (95% CI 0.62-1.90; p = 0.776).
conclusionIMN and plate fixation effectively achieved fracture union; however, plate fixation was associated with better shoulder function, reduced pain, and higher reoperation rates. IMN was linked to a lower risk of nerve injury but compromised shoulder ROM and resulted in more postoperative pain.
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.