©The Author(s) 2025.
World J Orthop. Sep 18, 2025; 16(9): 110859
Published online Sep 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.110859
Published online Sep 18, 2025. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.110859
Table 2 Summary of study design, groups, and variables
| Parameter | Description |
| Study design | Multicenter retrospective cohort study |
| Study period | January 2023–December 2023 |
| Total patients | 120 |
| Surgical approaches | Deltoid split (n = 70), deltopectoral (n = 50) |
| Inclusion criteria | Age > 18, Neer type II–IV, closed fracture, open reduction and internal fixation, 12-month follow-up |
| Exclusion criteria | Open/pathological fractures, prior surgery, incomplete data, polytrauma |
| Implant type | Anatomical locking plate |
| Outcomes measured | Constant-Murley, Quick-Disabilities in Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, Numeric Rating Scale, Short Form Health Survey-12v2 |
| Radiographic evaluation | Head-shaft angle, calcar restoration, complications |
| Statistical analysis | t-test, Mann–Whitney U, χ2, Fisher’s exact; P < 0.05 |
- Citation: Cicio C, Longo G, Pavone V, Testa G, Ortuso R, Salvo GC, Ganci M, Prestianni I, Ferrara A, Kory A, Pietropaolo A, Monachino AM, Cuffaro ER, Papotto G. Deltopectoral vs deltoid split approach for proximal humerus fractures treated with locking plate: Our experience. World J Orthop 2025; 16(9): 110859
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v16/i9/110859.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.110859