ArticleAdvanced biomedical research2025
Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Versus Resection of the Radial Head to Treat Terrible Triad Injury of the Elbow: What if Radial Head Replacement is not Possible?
Article in Advanced biomedical research, 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: Terrible triad of elbow injury (TTI) has great potential for joint instability with a relatively poor prognosis. Different surgical methods have been introduced for radial head fractures. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the results of treatment of radial head fractures with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and resection in TTI patients when radius head replacement was not attainable. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 48 patients with TTI who underwent radial head fracture surgery with ORIF (n = 33) or resection (n = 15) were included. During follow-up, patients were evaluated for elbow range of motion (ROM), pain score, complications, need for reoperation, and Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). ORIF and resection groups were followed for 49.47 ± 28.58 and 52.79 ± 23.57 months, respectively. Results: Compared to the resection group, the ORIF group had significantly better ROM in extension and pronation and lower supination, although, when compared with a subgroup of mason type III fractures, the resection group had substantially better ROM in extension, pronation, and supination and better MEPS. The resection group had lower rates of pain score, instability, arthritis, heterotopic ossification, and need for reoperation compared to ORIF and its subgroup; however, the difference was not significant. Conclusion: Compared to resection of radial head fractures in TTI, ORIF had significantly better ROM overall, but resection efficacy was better than ORIF when comparing the Mason type III fractures.
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.