Clinical Outcomes and Management Strategies for Capitellum and Trochlea Fractures: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Capitellum and trochlea fractures, also referred to as coronal shear fractures of the distal humerus, are infrequent yet challenging intra-articular fractures of the elbow. There are a variety of surgical approaches and fixation methods with often variable outcomes. This systematic review investigates interventions, outcomes and complications of capitellum and trochlea fractures. Methods: A systematic review of studies published in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health literature (CINAHL) was conducted to assess the clinical outcomes of capitellum and trochlea fractures managed surgically. Data on patient demographics, surgical approach, implant usage, postoperative outcomes and complications were compiled. Results: Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 700 patients. Surgical interventions primarily utilized either the lateral (79%) or antero-lateral (15%) approaches with headless compression screws as the most common fixation method (68%). Clinical outcomes were measured using the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) with a mean score of 89.9 (±2.6) and the DASH score with a mean of 16.9 (±7.3). Elbow range of motion showed a mean flexion of 126.3° (±19.4), extension of 5.71° (±11.8), pronation of 75.23° (±12.2), and supination of 76.6° (±9.8). The mean flexion-extension arc was 113.7° (±16.9), and the mean pronation-supination arc was 165.31° (±9.41). Complications occurred in 19.8% of cases, with re-interventions required in 8.3% of cases, mainly due to symptomatic implants and elbow stiffness requiring surgical release. Other complications included implant removal (10.4%), overall reported stiff elbows (6%), nerve palsies (2%), non-union (1.5%), and infection (1.2%). Conclusion: The treatment of capitellum and trochlea fractures yields satisfactory outcomes but has a considerable rate of complications and reoperations primarily due to symptomatic implants and elbow stiffness. There is noteworthy variability in the achieved range of motion, suggesting unpredictable outcomes. Deficits in functionality and range of motion are common after surgery, especially with more complex injury patterns.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".