We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Review
Systematic Review
Radial head fractures: effectiveness of conservative treatment versus surgical intervention. A systematic review.
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 2007 Februrary
INTRODUCTION: Radial head fractures are common elbow fractures. The Mason classification is used to describe the fracture. As of yet, there is no consensus on optimal treatment strategy for Mason II-IV fractures. The aim of this study was to compare the results of conservative treatment with different surgical strategies for radial head fractures.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases from 1966 to 2004 were screened. Based on our inclusion criteria, 24 studies, describing 825 patients, were included.
RESULTS: For Mason type II fractures, residual pain was present in 42% of the conservatively treated of the patients compared to 32% of the surgically treated patients. Good/excellent results for Broberg score were 52 and 88%, respectively. For Mason type III and IV fractures, no conservatively treated patients were described.
CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to be able to draw definitive conclusions on optimal treatment of type II-IV radial head fractures. Evidence is currently limited to a maximum level II evidence. There is great need for sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases from 1966 to 2004 were screened. Based on our inclusion criteria, 24 studies, describing 825 patients, were included.
RESULTS: For Mason type II fractures, residual pain was present in 42% of the conservatively treated of the patients compared to 32% of the surgically treated patients. Good/excellent results for Broberg score were 52 and 88%, respectively. For Mason type III and IV fractures, no conservatively treated patients were described.
CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to be able to draw definitive conclusions on optimal treatment of type II-IV radial head fractures. Evidence is currently limited to a maximum level II evidence. There is great need for sufficiently powered randomized controlled trials.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app