Operative management of capitellar fractures: A systematic review

Thai Q. Trinh, Joshua D. Harris, Gregory P. Kolovich, Michael J. Griesser, Mark S. Schickendantz, Grant L. Jones

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

16 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose: This study was conducted to evaluate reports of clinical outcomes of isolated capitellar fractures. Materials and methods: We conducted a systematic review of medical databases reporting clinical outcomes of patients undergoing nonoperative and operative management of isolated capitellar fractures. Results: We identified 28 studies for inclusion comprising 174 patients. All included studies were level IV evidence. Capitellar fractures were more common among women than men and were more likely to involve the nondominant arm. Type I fractures (84%) were more common than type II (14%) and III fractures (2%). Operative and nonoperative management both led to satisfactory clinical outcomes. No significant difference in outcomes was observed in those undergoing operative management compared with those undergoing closed reduction and immobilization. Conclusions: Nonoperative and operative management of isolated capitellar fractures leads to satisfactory clinical outcomes as determined by postoperative range of motion, improvement in pain, and a return to previous levels of function. No statistical difference in outcomes was observed between those undergoing operative management compared with those treated with closed reduction and immobilization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1613-1622
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Volume21
Issue number11
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2012

Keywords

  • Capitellum
  • Distal humerus
  • Elbow
  • IV (systematic review of studies with Level IV evidence, case series)
  • Review Article
  • Systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Operative management of capitellar fractures: A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this