Copyright
©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Orthop. May 18, 2025; 16(5): 105734
Published online May 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i5.105734
Published online May 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i5.105734
Table 1 Comparison of elbow angles measured in anteroposterior and lateral views among groups, mean ± SD
SCHF (n = 78 hasta) | DRF (n = 40) | Healthy volunteers (n = 98) | P value | |
Bauman angle | 74.33 ± 4.69 | 75.14 ± 3.39 | 76.16 ± 3.73 | 0.012 |
Humeroulnar angle | 11.26 ± 4.31 | 9.51 ± 2.99 | 8.52 ± 3.47 | < 0.001 |
Humerus metaphysis-diaphysis angle1 | 87.2 ± 3.56) | 87.68 ± 2.92 | 88 ± 2.02 | 0.0051 |
Humerus shaft-condylar angle | 35.5 ± 8.97 | NA2 | 36.67 ± 6.39 | 0.3373 |
Lateral capitellohumeral angle | 49.77 ± 10.29 | NA2 | 50.15 ± 9.99 | 0.8063 |
- Citation: Ülgen NK, Gencer B, Doğan Ö. Comparative analysis of elbow radiographic measurements in patients with supracondylar humerus fractures and healthy controls. World J Orthop 2025; 16(5): 105734
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v16/i5/105734.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i5.105734