ArticleJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2026
ORIF of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures: a retrospective study of long-term clinical and complication outcomes of two-plate fixation methods.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biomechanical and clinical comparison of a novel dual-wing locking plate versus the PHILOS plate for neer three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures: a finite element analysis combined with a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Effect of closed reduction and external fixation in elderly patients with anterior shoulder dislocation combined with humeral surgical neck fracture: a retrospective cohort study based on fracture-dislocation classification.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and complication rates during long-term follow-up (≥ 6 years) after treatment for three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures using two different types of locking plates. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 113 patients with three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures who underwent surgery between September 2012 and January 2019 were enrolled retrospectively. Data for 49 patients [ 9 males, 40 females; mean age [standard deviation] (SD ) 68.9 (5.8) years} treated with a PGR (intrauma) plate (group A) and 51 patients [10 males, 41 females; mean age (SD): 66.0 (7.5) years] treated with a PHILOS humeral plate (PHP, group B) were available at the last follow-up. The mean follow-up periods in groups A and B were 10.8 and 10.2 years, respectively, with a minimum follow-up of 6 years. At the final follow-up evaluation, functional outcomes were assessed using the Oxford Shoulder Scale (OSS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires. X-ray evaluation was also performed, and complications were recorded.
resultsThe mean OSS score in the PGR and PHP groups at follow-up was 42.9 and 39.1, respectively (p > 0.05). The SST score (PGR: 7.5 ± 2.0; PHP: 7.3 ± 4.0) and DASH score (PGR: 22.1 ± 5.5; PHP: 20.5 ± 4.0) were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). In our series, 6% of patients had complications; these included avascular necrosis of the humeral head (two cases in the PGR group and three in the PHF group) and one case of periplate fracture in the PGR group.
conclusionsAmong patients with three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures, both PGR plate and PHP treatment achieved comparable functional outcomes and demonstrated similarly low complication profiles. These results reinforce the appropriate clinical utility of either implant for fixation in the treatment of this fracture pattern. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.