ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2026
Efficacy of the MIPO approach combined with inverted Philos plate fixation in the treatment of AO/OTA type 12B distal humeral shaft fractures.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the clinical efficacy of the anterior minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) approach combined with the inverted proximal humeral internal locking system (Philos) plate in the treatment of distal humeral shaft fractures (DHSFs).
methodsThe clinical data of 72 patients with AO/OTA type B DHSFs in our hospital from August 2022 to February 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Thirty-five patients underwent internal fixation via the anterior MIPO approach combined with an inverted Philos plate (MIPO group), while 37 patients received internal fixation through the posterior approach using a posterolateral anatomical locking plate (control group). The length of hospital stay, incision length, operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and modified radiological union scale (mRUST) for the tibia at each follow-up point were observed and followed up. Constant Murley shoulder score (Constant score), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Short Form-36 (SF-36), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) of elbow joint, callus formation time, fracture healing time, and related complications were compared to evaluate the therapeutic effect.
resultsCompared with the control group, patients in the MIPO group had shorter postoperative hospital stay, less perioperative blood loss, shorter surgical incision, shorter time for callus formation and complete fracture healing, and higher mRUST scores at 3 and 6 months after surgery (P < 0.05). The Constant score, MEPS score, and SF-36 score in the MIPO group were higher than those in the control group at 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery (P < 0.05), but there was no difference between the two groups at 12 months after surgery. The NRS scores of the elbow joint were lower in the MIPO group at 1 month after surgery (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between the two groups at 3 and 6 months. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of complications (P > 0.05).
conclusionsThis study confirmed that the MIPO approach combined with inverted Philos plate fixation is an effective method for internal fixation of type 12B DHSFs. It shortens the postoperative hospital stay and promotes fracture healing without increasing operation time or intraoperative blood loss. Lower NRS score in the early stage helps patients to participate in functional exercise early and reduce the incidence of elbow stiffness, making this approach worthy of clinical application.
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.