ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Anterior Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis Versus Open Reduction Plate Osteosynthesis in Humeral Diaphyseal Fractures: A Functional and Clinical Analysis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The scope of this research was to examine the radiographic healing and functional results in OTA/AO type 12A and 12B humeral diaphyseal fractures (HDFs) treated surgically either by anterior minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) or by open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) along the posterior cortex of the humerus. Materials and Methods: In this prospective cohort observational analysis, experienced orthopedic surgeons performed two different surgeries in two non-randomly allocated groups of 30 patients each. Outcomes measured radiographic healing, defined as cortical bridging on orthogonal radiographs, and shoulder and elbow functional scores at multiple intervals over 1 year using the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), the mayo elbow performance index (MEPI), and the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) scores comparing the outcomes between both interventions using different statistical methods. Results: The study found insignificant variations in the age, sex, or AO/OTA fracture types between the groups. MIPO group had a significantly shorter time to healing (13.1 ± 3.1 weeks vs. 18.1 ± 4.7 weeks; P = 0.03), a better functional result of the shoulder and elbow (UCLA: 34.2 ± 2.7 vs. 32.8 ± 3.1; P = 0.05; MEPI: 90.3 ± 10.8 vs 88.7 ± 9.8; P = 0.04), and a lower DASH score (15.8 ± 3.1 vs. 17.9 ± 5.8; P = 0.03) than ORPO. Complications included two non-unions in ORPO and one in MIPO; radial nerve palsy occurred in four cases treated with ORPO. Conclusion: Anterior MIPO is a biologically favorable and skill-dependent approach for managing HDFs. While not simply a replacement for ORPO, it affords earlier radiographic union, reduced surgical morbidity, enhanced recovery of shoulder and elbow function, fewer secondary interventions, and allows safe avoidance of the radial and musculocutaneous nerves.
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.