Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Radial Head Fractures: Do Outcomes Differ Between Simple and Complex Injuries?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Radial head fractures can occur in isolation or in association with elbow and forearm injuries. Treatment options include nonoperative management, fragment or whole-head excision, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and radial head arthroplasty. However, the evidence supporting ORIF for repairable radial head fractures is inconclusive. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared patients undergoing ORIF for isolated radial head fractures or for radial head fractures associated with other fractures or elbow dislocations in terms of patient-related disability, presence of posttraumatic arthritis, complications, and rate of reoperation for capsular release. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2008, 52 patients underwent ORIF of the radial head for isolated radial head fractures (simple group) and 29 underwent ORIF for radial head fracture with an associated fracture or dislocation (complex group). General indications for ORIF included displaced radial fractures, large articular surface fragments, and greater than 2 mm of displacement and/or a mechanical block to forearm rotation or associated fractures or ligament injuries requiring surgery. Thirty-one patients (60%) in the simple group and 20 (69%) in the complex group were available for followup at a mean of 4 years (range, 1.0-9.5 years). We evaluated the patients using a validated self-reported pain and disability questionnaire (Patient-rated Elbow Evaluation [PREE]). Records review included radiographic examination and assessment of major complications and secondary surgery rates for capsular release. RESULTS: With the numbers available, the groups were not different in terms of the mean PREE scores (8 versus 15 for the simple and complex groups, respectively; p = 0.13, lower values indicate lower pain and disability). The simple and complex groups were also not different with the numbers available in terms of major complications (13% versus 25%, respectively; p = 0.29) or secondary capsular release (3% versus 20%, respectively; p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: At short term, we found no differences between patients treated with ORIF for isolated radial head fractures and those treated for radial head fractures in association with other elbow injuries with regard to pain and disability scores; loss to followup in this series precludes making statements with great confidence about function after these injuries. However, the substantial capsular release and complication rates should weigh into the preoperative discussion with patients before selecting ORIF for radial head fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".