Comparison of classical and minimally invasive superolateral approach for reconstruction of proximal humerus fractures with locking plates

Abstract

ContextMinimally invasive (MI) approaches are purported to present advantages for osteosynthesis when compared with conventional approaches. This study aimed to compare the medium-term clinical and radiological outcomes of patients with proximal humerus fractures treated by plate osteosynthesis with conventional and MI superolateral approaches. MethodThe study carried out was a retrospective monocentric comparative analysis. Forty-three cases were followed up – 18 were treated with an MI approach and 25 with a conventional approach. Constant-Murley, DASH and SSV scores were established and standard complications were investigated. ResultsNo significant differences in functional scores or complications were found between the 2 groups. The only significant difference was for pain which was significantly lower for the MI group. The overall revision rate was 18.3 %. The mean adjusted Constant-Murley for the entire population was 80.1 ± 20.2; the mean DASH score was 17.8 ± 15.9 and the mean SSV was 73.2 ± 19.5. ConclusionThis study did not demonstrate any significant differences between the 2 approaches. Given the low patient population in our series, the superiority of the MI approach – as indicated in the literature – was not proven.