Skip to main content
. 2017 Oct 24;4:34. doi: 10.1186/s40634-017-0111-7

Table 3.

Evaluation of the patients

Preoperative imaging Postoperative imaging Constant-Murley (CM) and DASH (D) score
PW
M
48 y		 graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figf_HTML.gif graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figk_HTML.gif CM: 85/100 ➔ “Good”
D: 13.33/100
RF
M
42 y		 graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figg_HTML.gif graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figl_HTML.gif CM: 55/100 ➔ “Poor”
D: 52.5/100
TR
F
67 y		 graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figh_HTML.gif graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figm_HTML.gif CM: 36/100 ➔ “Poor”
D: 76.39/100
VL
M
28 y		 graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figi_HTML.gif graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Fign_HTML.gif CM: 90/100 ➔ “Excellent”
D: 6.82/100
VR
M
60 y		 graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figj_HTML.gif graphic file with name 40634_2017_111_Figo_HTML.gif CM: /
D: /
➔ Homeless: lost for follow-up

M male, F female, y years old, DASH Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand