ArticleClinics in shoulder and elbow2026
The effects of coronoid fracture fixation on functional outcomes and complication rates following terrible triad injuries of the elbow.
Article in Clinics in shoulder and elbow, 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
backgroundManagement of the coronoid fracture in terrible triad injuries (TTI) of the elbow remains controversial. We compared outcomes of TTI patients with versus without coronoid fixation.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 105 TTI patients; 59 patients with no fixation (group 1) and 46 patients with coronoid fixation (group 2). Complications, revisions, range of motion (ROM) and functional scores (Mayo Elbow Performance Score [MEPS], Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [QuickDASH], Subjective Elbow Score [SES]) were assessed. Stratified analyses using t-tests and Fisher's exact tests with Cohen's d were performed according to O'Driscoll (OD) subtype (type 1 tip, type 2 anteromedial facet, and type 3 basal).
resultsBaseline OD distribution differed substantially between groups 1 and 2 (type 1: 79.7% vs. 34.8%, respectively; type 2: 18.6% vs. 58.7%, respectively; P<0.001). Follow-up timing was comparable between the two groups (first, 4.4 vs. 4.1 months; final, 3.0 vs. 2.8 years). In the whole cohort, group 2 patients showed greater flexion (P=0.030), pronation and supination (both P<0.001), and better MEPS (P=0.032), QuickDASH (P=0.027) and SES (P=0.044) than group 1 patients. Stiffness (22.0% vs. 2.2%, P=0.003) and revision surgery rates (30.5% vs. 10.9%, P=0.018) were significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2. Within OD type 2, fixation was associated with significantly greater flexion (P=0.001), pronation (P=0.005), and supination (P<0.001), and lower rates of nonunion (9% vs. 50%, P=0.046) and posttraumatic osteoarthritis (5% vs. 50%, P=0.025) than non-fixation.
conclusionsOD type 2 fractures repaired with coronoid fixation showed greater ROM and lower complication rates than these types of fractures repaired without coronoid fixation. Within OD type 1, coronoid fixation did not show any significant benefits compared to no fixation. Level of evidence: III, retrospective cohort study.
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.