ReviewCureus2025
Radial Head Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Mason Type III and IV Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal management of Mason type III and IV radial head fractures remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared outcomes of radial head arthroplasty (RHA) and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). A comprehensive search identified eight cohort studies involving 457 patients. Reported outcomes included range of motion (ROM), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score, and complication rates, with data synthesized using pooled effect estimates and heterogeneity assessed through the I² statistic. RHA was associated with significantly improved elbow extension, higher MEPS scores, and lower complication rates compared with ORIF, particularly in cases of severe comminution or Mason type IV fractures, whereas ORIF demonstrated comparable long-term ROM and DASH scores, especially in younger patients with less complex fracture patterns. Overall, RHA appears to provide superior functional outcomes and fewer complications in appropriately selected patients, while ORIF remains a reasonable option for younger individuals with simpler fracture configurations. Treatment decisions should be tailored to fracture severity, patient factors, and surgeon expertise, and further randomized controlled trials are required to establish definitive guidelines for managing complex radial head 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.