ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Complications, reoperations, and revisions after surgical treatment of humeral metastases with modular prosthesis, intramedullary nailing or plate fixation: a retrospective analysis.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeModular prosthesis, intramedullary nailing and plate fixation are surgical options for humeral metastasis, but the optimal treatment for pathological or impending fractures remains controversial. This study evaluated complications, reoperations, and revisions in patients with humeral metastases treated with these surgical techniques.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 115 patients with humeral metastases treated with modular prosthesis (n = 33), intramedullary nailing (n = 69) or plate fixation (n = 13). We evaluated complications, reoperations without implant removal and revisions requiring implant removal. Cumulative incidence of complications and death was estimated using competing risk analysis.
resultsIn modular prosthesis group, 5/33 patients had complications (15.1%): three had subluxations or instability treated conservatively, one had local disease progression treated with embolization and radiotherapy, and one had deep infection who required revision. In intramedullary nailing group, 8/69 patients had complications (11.6%): seven had local disease progression and one had mechanical implant failure. Two patients required reoperation due to local disease progression, and none required revision. In plate fixation group, 4/13 patients had complications (30.7%): two had mechanical implant failure, one had local disease progression, and one had deep infection. Reoperation was required in one patient due to infection, while revision was required in two patients: one patient due to local disease progression and one patient due to mechanical implant failure.
conclusionModular prosthesis, intramedullary nailing and plate fixation were associated with distinct complication profiles. Modular prostheses were most commonly associated with instability, intramedullary nails with local disease progression, and plate fixation with a relatively high proportion of complications and revisions. Given the heterogeneity of anatomical location and treatment indications, these findings should be interpreted descriptively rather than as evidence of superiority of one technique over another.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42371153What 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.