ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2026
Operative versus conservative management of distal humerus fractures in patients aged 65 years and older: a target-trial-informed retrospective cohort study of five-year mortality.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionOlder patients with distal humerus fractures die more often after conservative than after operative treatment in unadjusted comparisons; whether this reflects treatment or the selection of healthier patients for surgery is unresolved. We estimated the association between operative versus conservative management and five-year all-cause mortality in patients aged ≥ 65 years. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective comparative cohort study at two tertiary trauma centres (2012-2025). Cases were ascertained by automated screening of codes and free text, then adjudication of all uncertain records against source notes and injury radiographs, masked to treatment and vital status. Patients were classified by management initiated within 14 days as operative (n = 75) or conservative (n = 78); vital status was registry-linked. The primary estimand was the five-year restricted mean survival time (RMST) difference; principal adjusted estimates were inverse-probability-weighted (IPW) RMST and survival differences, requiring no proportional-hazards assumption. Cox, window and landmark analyses are supportive.
resultsAmong 153 patients (52 deaths), conservatively managed patients were older (median 83 vs. 73 years, p < 0.001). Unadjusted five-year mortality was 41.9% versus 18.4%: RMST difference + 11.2 months (95% CI + 5.6 to + 16.8), log-rank p = 0.006. After weighting for age, sex, comorbidity and centre this shrank to + 3.4 months (95% CI - 1.5 to + 8.6; adjusted five-year survival difference + 1.4%, - 14.7 to + 18.5), and to + 1.0 month (- 2.9 to + 5.5) within the covariate-overlap cohort (65-84 years). Comorbidity (HR 1.35 per Charlson point) and age (HR 1.72 per decade) predicted mortality in both arms. Sensitivity analyses were concordant.
conclusionsThe large unadjusted survival advantage of operative fixation shrank substantially after adjustment, and the remaining estimates are too imprecise to support any claim of survival benefit or harm. Because functional outcomes, the principal indication for surgery, were not measured, the study cannot inform individual treatment choice. Crude survival differences here should not be read as treatment effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective comparative 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.