MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415571000 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.11.025

THE IMPACT OF REDUCTION ON SURVIVORSHIP AND OUTCOMES FOLLOWING LOCKED PLATE FIXATION OF PROXIMAL HUMERUS FRACTURES

2025· article· en· W4415571000 on OpenAlexaff
Troy D. Bornes, Jeremy F. Kubik, Tyler Stevens, Christian Klinger, J. List, Kathryn A. Barth, Kavita Jain, Daniel E. Wellman, D. L. Helfet

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronal planeSurvivorship curveReduction (mathematics)Internal fixationRadiographyProximal humerusSagittal planeFixation (population genetics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proximal humerus fracture management remains controversial. There is evidence to suggest that open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with locked plating can lead to excellent outcomes. However, mixed results have been reported in some studies. Variables that impact outcome following locked plate fixation, including fracture reduction, require further elucidation. The objectives of this study were to evaluate survivorship and outcomes in a large series of proximal humerus fractures treated with locked plating and to discern the association between fracture reduction and outcome. This retrospective study included 147 patients from a single institution treated with locked plate fixation for unstable proximal humerus fractures during the period of 2008–2018. Fracture pattern, reduction, fixation characteristics, maintenance of reduction, and failure were evaluated on radiography. Follow-up data were collected from charts. Surveys were used to collect patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Signs of radiographic failure (new changes suggestive of osteonecrosis, arthritis, nonunion, fixation failure, hardware fracture, instability, and screw penetration) and history of re-operation were documented. Analysis was performed on 134 patients with ≥12 months follow-up. Survivorship free from revision surgery was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Independent t-tests and chi-squared tests were used to evaluate the association of variables with radiographic failure. Mean age was 58±15 years and 97 were female (66%). Baseline patient and fracture characteristics are outlined in Table 1. Following ORIF, coronal alignment was 135.5±9.84°; 133 fractures were fixed with adequate coronal alignment of 120–150° (90%) and 83 fractures were fixed with neutral coronal alignment of 130–140° (56%). Sagittal reduction was neutral in 138 (88%) and the head was noted to be tilted posteriorly in 9 (6%). The medial column was restored in 114 (78%). Mean follow-up duration was 5±3 years. Survivorship free from revision surgery was 95% at 1 year, 93% at 2 years, and 89% at 5 years. Revision surgery for failure was performed in 14 patients (10%) including arthroplasty for arthritis or osteonecrosis in 8 (5%), screw removal for joint penetration in 3 (2%), repair nonunion in 2 (1%), and Latarjet procedure for instability in 1 (1%). Radiographic evidence of failure included avascular necrosis in 11 (7%), arthritis in 10 (7%), nonunion in 3 (2%), screw penetration in 3 (2%), failure of fixation in 2 (1%), and instability in 1 (1%). Pre-operative factors associated with post-operative failure included female gender, fracture with head split, and fracture-dislocation (p Survivorship and outcomes following locked plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures were very good in this large series of proximal humerus fractures. Factors associated with failure included fracture pattern (fracture-dislocation and head-splitting fractures) and reduction (sagittal alignment). Locked plate fixation continues to be a viable option for management of unstable proximal humerus fractures. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207