Surgical Methods for the Management of Intra-articular Distal Humerus Fracture: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Pub Date : 2026-07-02 eCollection Date: 2026-10-01 DOI:10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7
Ali H Alyami, Abdullah A Ghaddaf, Mohammed S Alquhaibi, Abdullah Almansor, Abdullah Alharbi, Ali Althagafi, Saeed Alzahrani, Dhafer Almuffarh, Hani Sulimani
{"title":"Surgical Methods for the Management of Intra-articular Distal Humerus Fracture: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis.","authors":"Ali H Alyami, Abdullah A Ghaddaf, Mohammed S Alquhaibi, Abdullah Almansor, Abdullah Alharbi, Ali Althagafi, Saeed Alzahrani, Dhafer Almuffarh, Hani Sulimani","doi":"10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Intra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHF) carry a technical challenge for orthopedic surgeons, owing to the complex geometry of the distal humerus. Surgical management is the standard of care for these fractures. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of the different open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and arthroplasty techniques for the management of intra-articular DHFs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The databases Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they matched the following criteria: skeletally mature adult patients, including elderly and young adults, with type C bicolumnar intra-articular DHF according to the AO classification, and performed a pairwise comparison between any of the following interventions: (1) ORIF with perpendicular double plating; (2) ORIF with parallel double plating; (3) ORIF with Y-shaped double plating); (4) EHA; (5) TEA. The outcomes of interest in this study were arc of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and adverse event rate. The network meta-analysis was performed through a Bayesian-based framework using the BUGSnet package in R software. Treatments ranking was performed through the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten RCTs were found eligible for inclusion, representing 357 patients. The different surgical techniques showed similar results with respect to the arc of motion, and ORIF with parallel plating had the best rank (SUCRA = 83.56). ORIF techniques showed a significantly better MEPS score compared to arthroplasty, and ORIF with parallel plating had the best rank (SUCRA = 85.63). The adverse event rate was similar across the different surgical interventions and EHA showed the best rank (SUCRA = 67.53).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No substantial difference was found between the different surgical techniques with respect to the clinical outcomes and adverse events. ORIF with parallel plating showed the highest ranking with respect to arc of motion, MEPS score, and reducing risk of HO but without statistical significance. The choice of the appropriate surgical technique should be tailored to each patient under the consideration of the age, fracture pattern, and salvageability.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024603193.</p><p><strong>Supplementary information: </strong>The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7.</p>","PeriodicalId":13338,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","volume":"60 10","pages":"2727-2739"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13658702/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Orthopaedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Intra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHF) carry a technical challenge for orthopedic surgeons, owing to the complex geometry of the distal humerus. Surgical management is the standard of care for these fractures. The aim of this network meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes of the different open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and arthroplasty techniques for the management of intra-articular DHFs.

Methods: The databases Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for relevant studies. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they matched the following criteria: skeletally mature adult patients, including elderly and young adults, with type C bicolumnar intra-articular DHF according to the AO classification, and performed a pairwise comparison between any of the following interventions: (1) ORIF with perpendicular double plating; (2) ORIF with parallel double plating; (3) ORIF with Y-shaped double plating); (4) EHA; (5) TEA. The outcomes of interest in this study were arc of motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), and adverse event rate. The network meta-analysis was performed through a Bayesian-based framework using the BUGSnet package in R software. Treatments ranking was performed through the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA).

Results: Ten RCTs were found eligible for inclusion, representing 357 patients. The different surgical techniques showed similar results with respect to the arc of motion, and ORIF with parallel plating had the best rank (SUCRA = 83.56). ORIF techniques showed a significantly better MEPS score compared to arthroplasty, and ORIF with parallel plating had the best rank (SUCRA = 85.63). The adverse event rate was similar across the different surgical interventions and EHA showed the best rank (SUCRA = 67.53).

Conclusion: No substantial difference was found between the different surgical techniques with respect to the clinical outcomes and adverse events. ORIF with parallel plating showed the highest ranking with respect to arc of motion, MEPS score, and reducing risk of HO but without statistical significance. The choice of the appropriate surgical technique should be tailored to each patient under the consideration of the age, fracture pattern, and salvageability.

Trial registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024603193.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7.

肱骨远端关节内骨折的外科治疗方法:系统回顾和贝叶斯网络荟萃分析。
背景:由于肱骨远端复杂的几何形状,肱骨远端关节内骨折(DHF)对骨科医生来说是一个技术挑战。手术治疗是这些骨折的标准治疗方法。本网络荟萃分析的目的是比较不同切开复位内固定(ORIF)和关节成形术治疗关节内dhf的临床结果。方法:检索Medline、Embase和CENTRAL数据库进行相关研究。如果符合以下标准,纳入随机对照试验(RCTs):根据AO分类,骨骼成熟的成人患者,包括老年人和年轻人,患有C型双柱关节内DHF,并在以下任何干预措施之间进行两两比较:(1)ORIF与垂直双钢板;(2)平行双镀ORIF;(3) y型双镀ORIF;(4) EHA;(5)茶。本研究感兴趣的结果是运动弧度、梅奥肘部表现评分(MEPS)和不良事件发生率。网络元分析使用R软件中的BUGSnet包,通过基于贝叶斯的框架进行。通过表面累积排序(SUCRA)进行处理排序。结果:10项rct符合纳入条件,共357例患者。不同手术方式对运动弧度的影响相似,其中平行钢板ORIF排名最佳(SUCRA = 83.56)。与关节置换术相比,ORIF技术的MEPS评分明显提高,其中平行钢板ORIF评分最高(SUCRA = 85.63)。不同手术干预的不良事件发生率相似,EHA排名最高(SUCRA = 67.53)。结论:不同手术方式在临床疗效和不良事件方面无显著差异。ORIF在运动弧度、MEPS评分和降低HO风险方面排名最高,但无统计学意义。选择合适的手术技术应根据患者的年龄、骨折类型和可修复性进行调整。试验注册:普洛斯彼罗注册号:CRD42024603193。补充信息:在线版本包含补充资料,可在https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-026-01854-7上获得。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
9 months
期刊介绍: IJO welcomes articles that contribute to Orthopaedic knowledge from India and overseas. We publish articles dealing with clinical orthopaedics and basic research in orthopaedic surgery. Articles are accepted only for exclusive publication in the Indian Journal of Orthopaedics. Previously published articles, articles which are in peer-reviewed electronic publications in other journals, are not accepted by the Journal. Published articles and illustrations become the property of the Journal. The copyright remains with the journal. Studies must be carried out in accordance with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书