What Is the Probability of Radial Nerve Recovery After Surgical Repair of Humerus Fractures Accounting for Time Since Injury?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Radial nerve injury after operative treatment of humeral shaft fracture usually improves, but a subgroup of patients does not recover. Understanding the probability of recovery over time is important in deciding on watchful waiting, nerve exploration, or tendon or nerve transfer. Bayesian analysis is helpful in estimating such probabilities. This type of analysis is predicated on estimating the probability that an event will occur and subsequently updating that estimate as new information becomes available-for instance, when nerve recovery does not occur over time. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Using Bayesian methods applied to a previously studied cohort, we asked: (1) Over time, up to the end of 18 months, what is the probability of radial nerve motor recovery after surgical fixation of humerus fractures? (2) What variables are associated with the timing of radial nerve recovery? METHODS: Between January 2002 and November 2014, we treated 375 patients with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for a traumatic diaphyseal humeral fracture at six urban hospitals (two Level 1 trauma centers, two Level 2 trauma centers, and two community hospitals). From this previously studied cohort, we lost access to one hospital's data, leaving us with 295 records to screen for eligibility. We considered patients with an isolated preoperative or postoperative radial nerve palsy, defined as an inability to extend the wrist against gravity (Medical Research Council grade < 3), as potentially eligible. Based on that, 24% (72 of 295) were eligible; of those, 2.8% (2 of 72) were excluded because a nerve disruption was repaired during ORIF. Another 24% (17) had incomplete data sets, leaving 74% (53) for analysis here. Patients with incomplete data sets did not differ from analyzed patients with respect to demographics or injury characteristics. The median (IQR) age was 43 years (25 to 61), and 49% (26 of 53) of patients were male. Most palsies presented preoperatively (83% [44]). Motor recovery was defined as the ability to extend the wrist against gravity (Medical Research Council grade ≥ 3). We conceptualized the probability of radial nerve recovery over time as two conditional probabilities: (1) the probability that the nerve injury is recoverable (neuropraxia, or recoverable axonotmesis), and (2) the probability that it did not recover at a certain point in time. We used a Bayesian network analysis to model these two probabilities. We based our estimate of the probability of a recoverable nerve injury on the largest systematic review, in which 90% (438 of 488 [95% confidence interval (CI) 87% to 92%]) recovered. To reflect uncertainty, we repeated the analysis for the upper and lower limits of its CI. To estimate the probability that recovery did not happen yet at a certain point in time, we used the timing of recovery from the patients in our cohort. We used Cox proportional hazards analysis to examine associations between time to recovery and demographic and injury variables, including age, sex, fracture type and location, vascular injury, type of fixation, and timing of palsy (preoperative versus postoperative). RESULTS: If a nerve has not recovered by 7 months, the probability of nerve recovery by 18 months was still better than chance, at 56% (range 48% to 62%). If the nerve had not recovered by 1 year, then the probability of recovery was 17% (range 13% to 21%). No variables (such as age, fracture location, vascular injury, or fixation type) were associated with timing of radial nerve recovery. CONCLUSION: Providers can use our findings to counsel patients on the expected probability of nerve recovery, which might reduce anxiety while patients await recovery. These probabilities can aid in the decision whether and when nerve reconstruction, nerve transfers, or tendon transfers may be beneficial. Because the probability of recovery remains relatively high for at least 7 months after injury, early surgery is unlikely to be beneficial in patients with radial nerve motor injury after surgical fixation of humerus fractures. Future studies can provide more specific recovery probabilities by including findings on electrodiagnostic studies and patients treated nonoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,041 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».