ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
Operative vs. nonoperative treatment in Mason type II fractures: a meta-analysis.
Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: It is unclear whether patients benefit from operative treatment in Mason type II radial head fractures. This meta-analysis aims to compare the 2 treatment modalities regarding functional outcomes, complications, and quality of life. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing operative and nonoperative treatment for Mason type II fractures. Effect estimates were pooled using random-effects models. The primary outcome was elbow function, assessed by the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Secondary outcomes included range of motion, complications, reinterventions, and quality of life. Results: Four studies, including 3 observational studies and 1 randomized controlled trial, with a total of 181 patients were included. No significant difference in the Mayo Elbow Performance Score was observed between the operative and nonoperative group (mean difference: 2.67; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.48-9.83; I Conclusion: This meta-analysis could not demonstrate a clear advantage of operative treatment for Mason type II fractures in terms of function or complications. However, the long-term effect of surgery in preventing osteoarthritis remains uncertain and should be considered in the treatment decision, as well as the degree of fracture displacement, even within the Mason type II spectrum. Further research focusing on long-term follow-up is needed to make a definitive statement in this regard.
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.