ArticleDiseases (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Intramedullary Nailing Versus Modular Megaprosthesis in Pathological Humeral Fractures: A 10-Year Retrospective Comparative Study.
Article in Diseases (Basel, Switzerland), 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPathological fractures of the humerus secondary to metastatic disease represent a significant cause of pain, disability, and reduced quality of life in oncologic patients. Surgical management aims to restore stability, reduce pain, and allow early mobilization. However, the optimal strategy between intramedullary nailing and modular megaprosthesis remains debated, particularly in relation to functional outcomes and long-term results.
methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted on 48 patients treated for pathological or impending humeral fractures between January 2015 and January 2025. Twenty-six patients underwent intramedullary nailing (IMN group), while twenty-two were treated with tumor resection and modular megaprosthesis reconstruction (MP group). Functional outcomes were assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) at 1, 12, 24, 36, and 60 months, and at 10 years. Complications and overall survival were also analyzed.
resultsIntramedullary nailing demonstrated significantly superior early functional outcomes, with higher MSTS scores at 1 month (78% vs. 63%,
conclusionsBoth intramedullary nailing and modular megaprosthesis represent effective surgical options for pathological and impending humeral fractures. Intramedullary nailing provides faster early functional recovery, whereas megaprosthetic reconstruction offers a durable reconstructive solution for extensive proximal lesions. Functional outcomes progressively converged between the two techniques approximately 2-3 years after surgery. Mid-term outcomes up to five years appeared comparable, suggesting that surgical decision-making should be individualized according to lesion characteristics, tumor biology, expected survival, and functional demands.
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.