ArticleJSES international2026
Radial head replacement with intact lateral ulnar collateral ligament vs. repair and augmentation using nonabsorbable tape and anchors: a pragmatic comparative study.
Article in JSES international, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rupture of the lateral ulnar collateral ligament (LUCL), particularly in cases of complex radial head fractures, can occur in up to 80% of cases. The outcomes of radial head replacement in such scenarios may not be optimal despite ligament augmentation. The objective was to compare the clinical outcomes of radial head replacement in elbows with an intact LUCL to those with a complete LUCL rupture managed with repair and augmentation. Methods: From January 2021 to June 2023, 27 patients underwent radial head replacement surgery using the Antea modular mobile radial head prosthesis (Adler Ortho). The patients were divided into 2 groups: 15 without rupture of the LUCL ligament (group A) and 12 with rupture (group B), in whom the ligament was repaired and augmented using non absorbable tape and anchors. Patients with other associated ligament injuries or fractures were excluded. Post-operative outcomes were assessed using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the visual analog scale (VAS), and the range of motion (ROM) of the elbow. Follow-up assessments were conducted at 6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks postsurgery, and all patients completed the planned 52-week follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney Results: At 12 weeks, the flexion-extension arc was significantly greater in group A compared with group B (median 122° vs. 113.5°, Conclusion: The results of radial head replacement, even in cases with LUCL tear and LUCL repair and augmentation are satisfactory, particularly from the third month onward. In cases of augmentation, a residual extension deficit of the elbow was observed; however, it did not cause functional impairment as measured by the MEPS.
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.