ReviewJournal of children's orthopaedics2026
Clinical outcomes of management of primary medial epicondylar fractures: A systematic review with meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of children's orthopaedics, 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
Purpose: This analysis seeks to clarify the clinical efficacy of each treatment modality and inform evidence-based decision-making in the management of this common yet complex injury. Methods: A comprehensive systematic search was performed across major medical databases, including Medline (PubMed), Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, and CINAHL Ultimate, to identify studies addressing the outcomes of treatment for primary medial epicondyle fractures. Results: A total of 65 studies published between 1982 and 2026 were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled incidence of fracture union rate following surgical treatment was 97% (95% confidence interval (CI): 95%-98%). Conservative immobilization resulted in a markedly lower union rate of 46% (95% CI: 20%-74%). The overall complication rate following surgical treatment was 21% (95% CI: 16%-27%), compared to 36% (95% CI: 13%-63%) for conservative immobilization. Conclusion: Among surgical options, screw fixation was associated with high union rate and the lowest complication profile, with statistically distinct pooled estimates supporting its reliability in achieving stable healing and early mobilization. We believe that the pooled estimates from our study will be valuable in guiding clinical decision-making and will help assess the risk of potential outcomes and complications in patients with medial epicondyle fractures. Significance of Study: This study provides high-quality pooled evidence comparing surgical and conservative management of medial epicondyle fractures, helping clinicians make more informed, evidence-based decisions by clarifying differences in union rates, functional outcomes, and complication risks.
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.