Fixation Of Humeral Shaft Fractures Research Articles

No Differences in Clinical, Functional, or Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Trial of Nonoperative Management Before Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Humeral Shaft Fractures.

To test the hypothesis that primary osteosynthesis of humeral shaft fractures may lead to more favorable clinical, functional, and patient-reported outcomes than fixation following a trial of nonoperative management. Retrospective cohort review. Academic level I trauma center. Adult patients who presented with humeral shaft fractures and ultimately underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) from May 2011 to May 2021. Patients who underwent ORIF within 2 weeks of injury were grouped into the primary osteosynthesis cohort, and patients who underwent ORIF >4 weeks from the date of injury were grouped into the trial of nonoperative cohort. Postoperative complications, elbow arc of motion, time to radiographic union, and patient-reported outcomes were investigated and compared between the primary osteosynthesis and trial of nonoperative management cohorts. One hundred twenty-seven patients fit the study criteria, 84 underwent primary osteosynthesis and 43 trialed initial nonoperative treatment. No differences were found in patient demographics between the primary osteosynthesis and trial of nonoperative management cohorts, including age (53 ± 19 vs. 57 ± 18; P = 0.25), sex (39% vs. 44% male, 61% vs. 56% female; P = 0.70), and Body Mass Index (BMI) (30 ± 6 vs. 32 ± 9; P = 0.38). The average time to operative intervention in the primary osteosynthesis group was 4 days (0-14 days) and 105 days (28-332 days) in the trial of nonoperative treatment group ( P < 0.01). No differences were found with regard to intraoperative blood loss, total operative time, time to radiographic union (determined using the Radiographic Union Scores for Humeral scoring system), or overall complication rates, including primary and secondary radial nerve injuries ( P = 0.23 and 0.86, respectively). Patients reported similar patient-reported outcomes measurement information system pain interference ( P = 0.73), depression (D) ( P = 0.99), and physical function ( P = 0.66) scores at their 6-month postsurgical follow-up visits. Patients who attempted a trial of nonoperative management for humeral shaft fractures before ORIF had similar clinical, functional, and patient-reported outcomes as those who underwent primary osteosynthesis. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Intramedullary Nails vs Open Reduction in Internal Fixation for Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials.

The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare outcomes following intramedullary nailing (IMN) vs. open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of humeral shaft fractures. A literature search of three databases was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. RCTs comparing IMN and ORIF for humeral shaft fractures were included. Clinical outcomes were compared using Revman. P value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Ten RCTs with 512 patients were included. Overall, 8.4% of patients treated with IMN and 6.4% of patients with ORIF had a non-union (p = 0.57, I2 = 0%), with a significantly faster time to union with IMN (10 weeks vs 11.9 weeks , p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in re-operations (11.6% IMN vs 7.6% ORIF, p = 0.26) or radial nerve palsies (2.8% IMN vs 4.2% ORIF, p = 0.58). A lower rate of infection was noted with IMN (1.2% vs 5.3%, p < 0.5). Additionally, there was a lower operative time with IMN (61 minutes vs 88 minutes, p < 0.05). The level I evidence in the literature does not show a significant difference in union rates, re-operations or radial nerve palsies between IMN and ORIF for humerus shaft fractures. Overall, treatment with IMN results in lower infection rates, less operative time, and modestly quicker time to union. Optimal treatment strategy for humeral shaft fractures may be best informed by fracture pattern and surgeon preference.

Treatment of Iatrogenic Nerve Injury After Humeral Shaft Fracture Fixation: A Case Report

Background. Iatrogenic neuropathies of the radial nerve following intramedullary nailing of the humerus are observed in 2.9% of patients. In 30% of cases, iatrogenic nerve injury is associated with distal nail locking. Questions about the timing and volume of diagnostic measures to determine the nature of nerve damage, methods of conservative and surgical treatment, and their effectiveness remain relevant.&#x0D; Aim of the study to illustrate the causes, prevention methods, diagnosis, and treatment of iatrogenic radial nerve injuries in humeral shaft fractures through a clinical example.&#x0D; Case presentation. A 30-year-old female patient was admitted with a nonunion fracture of the left humerus and iatrogenic radial nerve injury three months after the fracture was fixed with a locking nail. A revision operation was performed: removal of the nail from the left humerus; re-fixation of the left humerus with a plate; revision, neurolysis, and plastic repair of the left radial nerve using autografts from the right sural nerve. Postoperative courses of medication therapy, physiotherapy, and therapeutic exercises were conducted. At 26 months after the surgery, complete range of motion and restoration of strength in active extension of the left wrist and three phalanges, abduction of the first finger, partial extension of the first finger, and restoration of sensitivity on the outer surface of the left forearm and the back of the hand were observed.&#x0D; Conclusion. Iatrogenic radial nerve injury primarily occurs as a result of incorrect technique when introducing locking screws during intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures. Delayed examination and surgical treatment of patients with injured radial nerve lead to a lack of full functional recovery, potential muscle atrophy, and impairment of their motor function. Surgical treatment aimed at restoring the radial nerve at an early stage after injury, combined with a full range of postoperative rehabilitation for a year, is the only correct treatment approach.

ANATOMICAL ANALYSIS OF DIFFERENT HELICAL PLATE DESIGNS FOR PROXIMAL HUMERAL SHAFT FRACTURE FIXATION

Helical plates are preferably used for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation and potentially avoid radial nerve irritation as compared to straight plates. Aims:(1) to investigate the safety of applying different long plate designs (straight, 45°-, 90°-helical and ALPS) in MIPO-technique to the humerus. (2) to assess and compare their distances to adjacent anatomical structures at risk.MIPO was performed in 16 human cadaveric humeri using either a straight plate (group1), a 45°-helical (group2), a 90°-helical (group3) or an ALPS (group4). Using CT-angiography, distances between brachial arteries and plates were evaluated. Following, all specimens were dissected, and distances to the axillary, radial and musculocutaneous nerve were evaluated.None of the specimens demonstrated injuries of the anatomical structures at risk after MIPO with all investigated plate designs. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the radial nerve was 1(1-3) in group1, 7(2-11) in group2, 14(7-25) in group3 and 6(3-8) in group4. It was significantly longer in group3 and significantly shorter in group1 as compared to all other groups, p&lt;0.001. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the musculocutaneous nerve was 16(8-28) in group1, 11(7-18) in group2, 3(2-4) in group3 and 6(3-8) in group4. It was significantly longer in group1 and significantly shorter in group3 as compared to all other groups, p&lt;0.001. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the brachial artery was 21(18-23) in group1, 7(6-7) in group2, 4(3-5) in group3 and 7(6-7) in group4. It was significantly longer in group1 and significantly shorter in group3 as compared to all other groups, p&lt;0.021.MIPO with 45°- and 90°-helical plates as well as ALPS is safely feasible and showed a significant greater distance to the radial nerve compared to straight plates. However, distances remain low, and attention must be paid to the musculocutaneous nerve and the brachial artery when MIPO is used with ALPS, 45°- and 90°-helical implants. Anterior parts of the deltoid insertion will be detached using 90°-helical and ALPS implants in MIPO-technique.

Small-Fragment Plate Fixation of Humeral Shaft Fractures.

Fixation of humeral shaft fractures is frequently performed with large-fragment (4.5 mm) plates to accommodate immediate weight bearing. Use of small-fragment (3.5 mm) plates as an alternative carries theoretical benefits. We examined nonunion rates and postoperative radial nerve palsy (RNP) rates in a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation of humeral shaft fractures with 3.5-mm or 4.5-mm plates. Two hundred thirty-six patients with 241 humeral shaft fractures were included. Small 3.5-mm plates were used in 83% of the patients, and large 4.5-mm plates were used in 17% of the patients. Fifty-three percent were made weight bearing as tolerated following surgical fixation. There was a 7% incidence of nonunion and a 10% incidence of RNP in the 3.5-mm plate group. There was a 7% incidence of nonunion and a 15% incidence of RNP in the 4.5-mm plate group. No statistically significant relationship was shown between nonunion or RNP and plate size (P=.74 and P=.39). No relationship was shown between nonunion and postoperative weight-bearing status (P=.45). Subgroup analysis according to plate size additionally showed no association of nonunion with postoperative weight bearing in both the 4.5-mm (P=.55) and the 3.5-mm (P=.25) cohorts. Small-fragment and large-fragment plating of humeral shaft fractures resulted in comparable union and RNP rates, regardless of postoperative weight-bearing status. Our findings suggest that 3.5-mm plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures is a safe alternative to 4.5-mm plate fixation. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(4):198-204.].

Inadequate proximal screw fixation increases risk of failure following plate fixation of diaphyseal humerus fractures

BackgroundOperative treatment of humeral shaft fractures (AO/OTA 12) is being performed more frequently. Accordingly, it is important to understand the complications associated with plate fixation. This study analyzes risk factors associated with mechanical failure following plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures in order to further elucidate the mode and location of failure.MethodsA retrospective review of 351 humeral shaft fractures was completed at a single level I trauma center. Eleven of eighty-five humeral shaft fractures had aseptic mechanical failure requiring revision (12.9%), following initial plate fixation. Fracture characteristics (AO type, comminution, location) and fracture fixation (plate type, multiplanar, number of screws proximal and distal to the fracture) were compared between aseptic mechanical failure and those without failure. A forward stepwise logistic regression analysis was performed to determine any significant predictors of aseptic mechanical failure.ResultsThere was significant differences in fixation between the aseptic mechanical failure group and those without failure, specifically in the number of screws for proximal fixation (p = 0.008) and distal fixation (p = 0.040). In the aseptic mechanical failure group, patients tended to have less than < 8 cortices of proximal fixation (82%) and less than < 8 cortices of distal fixation (64%). Conversely, in patients without mechanical failure there was a tendency to have greater than > 8 cortices in both the proximal (62%) and distal fixation (70%). A forward stepwise logistic regression analysis found that less than < 8 cortices of proximal fixation was a significant predictor of aseptic failure, OR 7.96 (p = 0.011). We think this can be accounted for due to the variable bone quality, thinner cortices and multiple torsional forces in the proximal shaft that may warrant special consideration for fixation.ConclusionThe current dogma of humeral shaft fracture stabilization is to use a minimum of 3 screws proximal and distal to the fracture, however the current study demonstrates this is associated with higher rates of mechanical failure. In contrast, 4 bicortical screws or more of fixation on either side of the fracture had lower failure rates and may help to reduce the risk of mechanical failure.Level of Evidence Level III.

Fixation of humerus shaft fractures in polytrauma patients does not improve short-term outcomes

BackgroundSurgical fixation of humeral shaft fractures is widely considered a relative indication for polytraumatized patients to improve mobility and expedite care. This study aimed to determine whether operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures improves short term outcomes in polytrauma (PT] patients. MethodsUsing the National Trauma Data Bank, PT patients with humeral shaft fractures were identified from 2010-2015. Three PT groups were analyzed: Group 1 – PT with nonoperative humeral shaft fracture, Group 2 – PT with humeral fixation on Day 1, and Group 3 – PT with humeral fixation on Day 2+. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to compare discharge timing and days on ventilator and in ICU between the three groups. ResultsThere were 395 patients in Group 1, 1,346 in Group 2, and 1,318 in Group 3. There were no differences between the three groups when comparing Glasgow Coma Scale (p=0.3]; however, Injury Severity Score and Abbreviated Injury Scale were statistically different (p<0.001]. No differences were found in ICU or ventilator days between the three groups (p=0.2, p=0.5]. For Length of Stay, no difference was observed in Group 1 vs. Group 2 and Group 2 vs. Group 3. However, non-surgical patients were discharged 20% faster than those with Day 1 surgery (p=0.005]. Open fractures were treated one day earlier than closed fractures but discharged one day later (p<0.001]. ConclusionsThis NTDB study demonstrates no differences in length of stay, days in the ICU or on the ventilator in patients with humeral shaft fractures treated non-operatively versus operative fixation. Overall, 44%-58% in all 3 groups had an ISS ≥ 14. Based on these results, we assert that fixation of the humeral shaft provides no short-term benefits in the multiply injured patient.

Use of the HemaClear™ elastic tourniquet reduces blood loss in operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures

BackgroundTo determine if the use of a narrower elastic tourniquet compared to a standard pneumatic tourniquet reduces operative blood loss in the operative fixation of humeral shaft fractures. MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was performed at a level I trauma center and included 134 patients, aged 18 to 90 years, with a humeral shaft fracture treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) from January 2007 through June 2018. The primary variable of interest was the application of a HemaClear™ elastic tourniquet versus a standard pneumatic tourniquet during the fixation of a humeral shaft fracture. The primary outcome was estimated blood loss (EBL) during the humerus ORIF surgery as recorded in the operative record. The secondary outcomes were total tourniquet time and operative time. The primary purpose of the study was to compare the above outcomes between the two tourniquet types. ResultsEstimated blood loss was 42% lower (95% CI: 11% to 73%, p < 0.01) in the elastic tourniquet group when compared to the standard pneumatic tourniquet group. The use of the elastic tourniquet was also associated with a 67% increase (95% CI: 35% to 100%, p < 0.01) in tourniquet time compared to the standard pneumatic tourniquet. No difference in the total operative time between the two groups (difference, -3%; 95% CI: -21 to 14, p = 0.72) was observed. ConclusionElastic tourniquet use was associated with 42% less blood loss in the fixation of humeral shaft fractures compared to use of a traditional pneumatic tourniquet, although this may be of unclear clinical importance given the relatively low estimated blood loss in this cohort. The potential benefit of reduced blood loss associated with the narrower elastic tourniquet is likely caused by the increased tourniquet time, without a change in overall operative time.

Anatomical analysis of different helical plate designs for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation.

Helical plates are preferably used for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixationand potentially avoid radial nerve irritation. Safety of applying fourdifferent long plate designs (straight, 45°-, 90°-helical and ALPS) with MIPO technique as well as assessment and comparison of their distances to adjacent anatomical structures. MIPO was performed in 16 humancadaveric humeri using either a straight (group1), a 45°-helical (group2), a 90°-helical (group3) plate,or an ALPS (group4). Applying CT angiography, distances between brachial arteries and plates were evaluated. All specimens were dissected and distances to the axillary, radial and musculocutaneous nerve were evaluated. No specimens demonstrated injuries of the anatomical structures at risk after MIPO with all investigated plate designs. Closest overall distance (mean(range); mm) between each plate and the radial nerve was 1(1-3) in group1, 7(2-11) in group2, 14(7-25) in group3 and 6(3-8) in group4. It was significantly bigger in group3 and significantly smaller in group1 compared to all other groups, p < 0.001. Closest overall distance between each plate and the musculocutaneous nerve was 16(8-28) in group1, 11(7-18) in group2, 3(2-4) in group3 and 6(3-8) in group4. It was significantly bigger in group1 and significantly smaller in group3 compared to all other groups, p < 0.001. MIPO with 45°- and 90°-helical plates as well as withALPS is safely feasible and demonstrates significantly bigger distances to the radial nerve compared to straight plates. However, thedistances remain small and attention must be paid to the musculocutaneous nerve and the brachial artery when MIPO is applied using ALPS, 45°- and 90°-helical implants.

Routine fixation of humeral shaft fractures is cost-effective : cost-utility analysis of 215 patients at a mean of five years following nonoperative management.

AimsThe primary aim was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of routine operative fixation for all patients with humeral shaft fractures. The secondary aim was to estimate the health economic implications of using a Radiographic Union Score for HUmeral fractures (RUSHU) of < 8 to facilitate selective fixation for patients at risk of nonunion.MethodsFrom 2008 to 2017, 215 patients (mean age 57 yrs (17 to 18), 61% female (n = 130/215)) with a nonoperatively managed humeral diaphyseal fracture were retrospectively identified. Union was achieved in 77% (n = 165/215) after initial nonoperative management, with 23% (n = 50/215) uniting after surgery for nonunion. The EuroQol five-dimension three-level health index (EQ-5D-3L) was obtained via postal survey. Multiple regression was used to determine the independent influence of patient, injury, and management factors upon the EQ-5D-3L. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of < £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained was considered cost-effective.ResultsAt a mean of 5.4 yrs (1.2 to 11.0), the mean EQ-5D-3L was 0.736 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.697 to 0.775). Adjusted analysis demonstrated the EQ-5D-3L was inferior among patients who united after nonunion surgery (β = 0.103; p = 0.032). Offering routine fixation to all patients to reduce the rate of nonunion would be associated with increased treatment costs of £1,542/patient, but would confer a potential EQ-5D-3L benefit of 0.120/patient over the study period. The ICER of routine fixation was £12,850/QALY gained. Selective fixation based on a RUSHU < 8 at six weeks post-injury would be associated with reduced treatment costs (£415/patient), and would confer a potential EQ-5D-3L benefit of 0.335 per ‘at-risk patient’.ConclusionRoutine fixation for patients with humeral shaft fractures to reduce the rate of nonunion observed after nonoperative management appears to be a cost-effective intervention at five years post-injury. Selective fixation for patients at risk of nonunion based on their RUSHU may confer even greater cost-effectiveness, given the potential savings and improvement in health-related quality of life.Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(7):566–572.

Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of Intramedullary Nail and Locking Compression Plate in the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Objective The surgical treatment scheme of humeral shaft fracture is still controversial with no consensus reached. This meta-analysis was aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of intramedullary nail (IMN) and locking compression plate (LCP) in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Methods PubMed, Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and Chinese databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure Project, Wanfang database, and China biomedical abstracts database, were used to search the literature. Review Manager software was employed for statistical analysis and establishing forest and funnel maps. Categorical variables were measured by relative risk (RR), and standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to measure continuous variables. 95% confidence intervals were used for each variable. The modified Jadad scale, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and Cochrane's bias risk tools were used to evaluate the bias and risk of eligible studies. Results A total of 14 studies were included in the analysis with a total of 903 patients with humeral shaft fracture. Significant differences with regard to operation time (Std = −1.18, 95% CI: -2.14, -0.22, Z = 2.41, P = 0.02), blood loss (Std = −2.97, 95% CI: -4.32, -1.63, Z = 4.34, P < 0.001), and postoperative infection rate (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: -0.15, 0.68, Z = 2.98, P = 0.003) were noted between the IMN group and LCP group. In addition, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score (Std = −0.22, 95% CI: -0.44, 0.01, Z = 2.08, P = 0.04) and the rate of shoulder and elbow function limitation (RR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.06, 3.33, Z = 2.17, P = 0.03) between the 2 groups were also statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the rate of radial nerve injury, nonunion, delayed healing, and secondary operation between the two groups. Conclusion IMN is superior than the LCP in terms of the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative infection, suggesting its superiority in the humeral shaft fracture fixation. However, IMN is inferior to LCP in ASES score and shoulder elbow function limitation rate, indicating poor early postoperative functional recovery. More studies are required to evaluate and analyze the clinical efficacy between IMN and LCP regarding long-term function after artificial graft removal.

Anatomical analysis of different helical plate designs for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation

Abstract Objective Helical plates are preferably used for proximal humeral shaft fracture fixation with metaphyseal extension into the humeral head and potentially avoid radial nerve irritation as compared to straight plates. The aims of this study were: (1) to investigate the safety of applying different long plate designs (straight, 45°-, 90°-helical and ALPS) in MIPO-technique to the humerus and (2) to assess and compare their distances to adjacent anatomical structures at risk. Methods MIPO was performed in 16 human cadaveric humeri using either a straight plate (group1), a 45°-helical (group2), a 90°-helical (group3) or an ALPS (group4). Using CT-angiography, distances between brachial arteries and plates were evaluated. Following, all specimens were dissected, and distances to the axillary, radial and musculocutaneous nerve were evaluated. Results None of the specimens demonstrated injuries of the anatomical structures at risk after MIPO with all investigated plate designs. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the radial nerve was 1(1–3) in group1, 7(2–11) in group2, 14(7–25) in group3 and 6(3–8) in group4. It was significantly longer in group3 and significantly shorter in group1 as compared to all other groups, p&amp;lt;0.001. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the musculocutaneous nerve was 16(8–28) in group1, 11(7–18) in group2, 3(2–4) in group3 and 6(3–8) in group4. It was significantly longer in group1 and significantly shorter in group3 as compared to all other groups, p&amp;lt;0.001. Closest overall distance (mm(range)) between each plate and the brachial artery was 21(18–23) in group1, 7(6–7) in group2, 4(3–5) in group3 and 7(6–7) in group4. It was significantly longer in group1 and significantly shorter in group3 as compared to all other groups, p&amp;lt;0.021. Conclusion MIPO with 45°- and 90°-helical plates as well as ALPS is safely feasible and showed a significant greater distance to the radial nerve compared to straight plates. However, distances remain low, and attention must be paid to the musculocutaneous nerve and the brachial artery when MIPO is used with ALPS, 45°- and 90°-helical implants. Moreover, the anterior part of the deltoid insertion will be detached when using 90°-helical and ALPS implants in MIPO-technique.

Elastic Stable Intramedullary Nailing for Pediatric Humeral Shaft Fractures Under Ultrasonographic Guidance: A Retrospective Study.

ObjectiveFixation with an elastic stable intramedullary nail (ESIN) is a widely used technique for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Ultrasonography (US) is used as an auxiliary tool and alternative to radiography during surgery to reduce radiation damage, but whether it is effective in pediatric patients is not known. In this study we evaluated the utility of US in the treatment of pediatric humeral shaft fractures by closed reduction and fixation with an ESIN.MethodsChildren who were admitted to our hospital with humeral shaft fractures were retrospectively examined from January 2016 to March 2019. The patients were divided into 2 groups, US (treated by US-guided closed reduction and ESIN fixation) and non-US (treated with the same technique but with intraoperative radiography instead of US). The postoperative functional recovery of the 2 groups was compared.ResultsThe study population comprised 28 boys and 17 girls (age range: 4–16 years) with humeral shaft fractures. US significantly reduced radiation exposure during the operation (P = 0.008), and intraoperative US facilitated the detection of nerve and vascular injury and aided surgical planning. There was no difference between the 2 groups in postoperative recovery based on the Constant–Murley shoulder score (CMS).ConclusionsThese results demonstrate that US-guided closed reduction and ESIN fixation for humeral shaft fractures can limit radiation exposure and help doctors to determine the optimal surgical strategy to avoid radial nerve injury.

The risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery injury in anterolateral humeral plating using a 4.5 mm narrow DCP: A cadaveric study.

Fixation of humeral shaft fractures with a plate and screws can endanger the neurovascular structure if proper care is not taken. No studies to our knowledge have studied the risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery (RNPBA) injury from each screw hole of a 4.5 mm narrow dynamic compression plate (narrow DCP). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk of RNPBA injury in anterolateral humeral plating with a 4.5 mm narrow DCP. 18 humeri of 9 fresh-frozen cadavers in the supine position were exposed via the anterolateral approach with 45 degrees of arm abduction. A hypothetical fracture line was marked at the midpoint of each humerus. A precontoured ten-hole 4.5mm narrow DCP was applied to the anterolateral surface of the humerus using the fracture line to position the center of the plate. All screw holes were drilled and screws inserted. The cadaver was then turned over to the prone position with 45 degrees of arm abduction, and the RNPBA exposed. The holes through in which 100% of the screw had contact with or penetrated the RNPBA were identified as dangerous screw holes, while lesser percentages of contact were defined as risky. The relative distance ratios of the entire humeral length from the lateral epicondyle of the humerus to the 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st proximal holes were 0.64, 0.60, 0.56 and 0.52, respectively. The most dangerous screw hole was the 2nd proximal, in which all 18 screws had contacted or penetrated the nerve, followed by the risky 1st (12/18), 3rd (8/18) and 4th (2/18) holes. In humeral shaft plating with the 4.5mm narrow DCP using the anterolateral approach, the 2nd proximal screw hole carries the highest risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery injury.

Comparison of direct surgical cost for humeral shaft fracture fixation: open reduction internal fixation versus intramedullary nailing.

Background and/or HypothesisPrior literature has supported similar complication rates and outcomes for humeral shaft fractures treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with a plate/screw construct versus intramedullary nailing (IMN). The purpose of this study is to determine whether surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) differ between ORIF and IMN for these fractures.MethodsAdult patients (≥ 18 years) treated for isolated humeral shaft fractures by ORIF or IMN between June 18, 2014 and June 17, 2019 at a single tertiary academic center were available for inclusion. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN groups, obtained through our institution's information technology value tool, were adjusted to 2019 US dollars and converted to relative costs per institutional policy. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.ResultsDemographic factors did not differ between ORIF and IMN cohorts with the exception of age (mean of 18.6 years older for IMN; P < .001) and American Society of Anesthesiologist class (higher for IMN; P = .029). Substantial cost variation was observed among the 39 included ORIF and 21 IMN cases. Costs pertaining to operating room utilization (P = .77), implants (P = .64), and the recovery room (P = .27) were similar for ORIF and IMN, whereas supply costs were significantly greater for IMN with a median (interquartile range) of 0.21 (0.17 ∼ 0.28), more than twice the supply costs of ORIF (0.09 [0.05 ∼ 0.13], P < .001). The SETDC of IMN was significantly greater than that of ORIF (median [interquartile range]:1.00 [0.9 to 1.13] vs. 0.83 [0.71∼1.05], respectively; P = .047).Discussion and/or ConclusionOur study found that the SETDC for humeral shaft fracture fixation was greater for IMN than for ORIF, although patient cohorts differed significantly with respect to age and the American Society of Anesthesiologist class. Surgeons should take these findings into consideration when consenting patients with humeral shaft fractures for the appropriate fixation type.

A prospective randomised control study on dynamic compression plating versus intra medullary interlocking nailing in humeral diaphyseal fractures

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Surgical fixation of humeral shaft fractures generally involves plating or nailing. Despite the extensive literature comparing outcomes after open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) with plating and interlocking intramedullary nailing (ILIMN) for acute humeral diaphyseal fractures, the superior treatment strategy still remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional outcome of each method of fixation (dynamic compression plating and interlocking nailing) for the shaft of humerus fracture and to analyse statistically significant difference in the results of these two methods in terms of functional outcome, rate of healing and complications.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; We conducted a prospective randomized control study and evaluated the results of 50 patients having humeral shaft fracture which were internally fixed with antegrade interlocking nailing (25 patients) and dynamic compression plating (DCP) plate (25 patients). Patients were followed up on average of 11.4 months and their radiological outcomes were assessed with plain radiography and with DASH score.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; The plating group had statistically significant faster radiological healing and better DASH score compared to nailing group. Also, postoperative complication rate was higher in ILN group which was statistically significant.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; ORIF with DCP provides better results in terms of good functional outcome, faster radiological union and less post-operative complications compared to ILIM nailing. Hence, we concluded that plating is a superior option than nailing.&lt;/p&gt;

A Retrospective Analysis of Plate Fixation of Humerus Fracture

Introduction: Humeral shaft fractures represent 1–3% of all the fractures coming in our OPD.These fractures are mostly treated conservatively. Both the plate fixation and nailing techniques arebeing used but plate fixation has the advantage of lesser rates of malunion and non-union. Ourstudy aimed to evaluate the results of plate fixation in our hospital that employs plate fixation as thegolden standard. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patientstreated for a humeral shaft fracture in our hospital (District Hospital Vidisha associated with ABVMedical College, Vidisha between July 2018 and June 2020 with a mean follow-up of 6 months.Results: Plate fixation was performed in 40 patients with a humeral shaft fracture. The mean agewas 50 (SD 20) years with 60 % (n = 24) being male. There were 55 % (n = 22) fractures in theright and 45 % (n =18) fractures in the left. None of the patients develops superficial surgical siteinfection. Complications like Radial Nerve palsy, Deep surgical site infections and Non-union occurredin 2.5 % (n = 1), 2.5 % (n = 1) and 5 % (n = 2) of patients, respectively. The median duration ofradiological fracture healing was 18 (range 10–42) weeks. Conclusion: Plate fixation for humeralshaft fractures has low risks of complications. The complications can be further minimized withgreater surgical expertise.

Outcomes of plate-screw fixation of humeral shaft fractures in three hospitals of the city of Yaoundé

Background: Surgical management of humeral fractures involves several methods including plate-screw fixation, intramedullary nailing, external fixation, and pinning. Nowadays, the most used surgical method is plate-screw fixation. Objective: The aim of this study was to present the short-, medium- and long-terms outcomes of plate-screw fixation of humeral fractures in three hospitals in the city of Yaoundé. Material and Methods: This was a descriptive and retrospective study with prospective evaluation carried out in the orthopedic and trauma surgery departments of three hospitals in the city of Yaoundé, over a period of 6 years and 4 months. We analyzed the medical records of the operated patients and did a physical reevaluation of the patients using a pre-conceived tested data sheet. The following variables were studied: socio-demographic characteristics, fracture profile, clinical and radiological profile, and the functional prognosis of the shoulder and elbow joints (using the Constant and Murley score, and the Mayo elbow performance score respectively). Data analysis was done using the software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23.0. Results: Eighty-two cases of osteosynthesis were recorded. The mean age of the patients was 37.9 ± 11.5 [16 – 71] years and there was a male predominance (sex ratio of 2.7). The dominant humerus was most involved (96.4%). Closed fractures were predominant (65.8%), and the majority (47%) of them were simple fractures. The diaphysis was the most affected bone part (69.5%). Road traffic accidents accounted for 70.7% of the fractures. Two patients had a polytrauma, 26 had multiple fractures, and 54 had an isolated humeral fracture. The mean operating time (for the osteosynthesis) was 122 min and the mean blood loss volume during surgery was 296 cc. There was a significant correlation between these two variables. Postoperative complications included 8 cases of postoperative radial palsies (who recovered within an average of 4 months), 06 cases of superficial skin infections, 05 cases of secondary displacements, 03 cases of implant damage and 02 cases of vicious callus. The bone reductions were sub-anatomical in 79% and cortical fixation was good in 72.6% of cases. Consolidation was achieved within an average of 18 weeks. The consolidation time significantly varied according to the type of fracture line and the type of reduction obtained. Functional recovery of the shoulder and elbow was nearly normal in all patients. The mean Constant and Murley score was 96.9 while the mean Mayo elbow performance score of 97.3. Conclusions: Plate-screw fixation enables an adequate management of humeral fractures with acceptable clinical and radiological results, low complication rates, and good functional outcomes.

The Efficacy of Ultrasound for Visualizing Radial Nerve Lesions with Coexistent Plate Fixation of Humeral Shaft Fractures

IntroductionUltrasound has been commonly employed for depicting the morphology of the lesions in patients with radial nerve neuropathy, including entrapment, tumor, trauma, and iatrogenic injury. However, few studies have evaluated the efficacy of ultrasound for visualizing radial nerve lesions with coexistent plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures. This study aimed to address this special clinical issue. MethodsWe retrospectively examined the efficacy of ultrasound for visualizing radial nerve lesions with coexistent plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures based on intraoperative findings in patients who were treated in our hospital from January 2007 to June 2019. ResultsForty-six patients were included, and there was a 100% concordance between the ultrasound and intraoperative findings on radial nerve lesions. Ultrasonography revealed four types of lesions: radial nerve in continuity in thirty-one patients, neuroma in continuity in four patients, radial nerve stuck under the plate in three patients, and radial nerve transection in eight patients. The lesion radial nerve in continuity comprised two situations according to intraoperative electrodiagnostic test results, which could not be differentiated by ultrasonography, radial nerve in continuity treated with neurolysis in twenty-five patients and radial nerve in continuity treated with nerve graft in six patients. ConclusionUltrasonography can accurately depict radial nerve lesions with coexistent plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures. It provides a basis for determining the extent of nerve damage in all patients except those with the lesion radial nerve in continuity, which is conducive to making treatment decisions as early as possible.

A Shift From Non-operative Care to Surgical Fixation of Pediatric Humeral Shaft Fractures Even Though Their Severity Has Not Changed.

Introduction: Humeral shaft fractures have traditionally been treated non-operatively due to their good union and low rate of functional impairment. In the recent years, upper extremity fractures and their operative treatment have increased in children. Nevertheless, the trends of humeral shaft fractures are not clear.Materials and Methods: All children aged <16 years, with a humeral shaft fracture in the geographical catchment area of Northern Finland Hospital District, with a yearly child population-at-risk of ~86 000 from the year 2001 until the end of 2015 were included. There were 88 cases, who comprised the study population. Radiographs were available of all. Injury, patient, and treatment characteristics were reviewed from hospital databases.Results: There was an increasing trend of surgical fixation of humeral shaft fractures during the 15 years' study period (β = 1.266, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.36, p = 0.035). However, we found no patient or fracture-related reasons that could have explained the increasing trend of surgical care. Comminuted fracture increased the risk of operative treatment 8-fold (Odds Ratio, OR 7.82, 95% CI 1.69 to 36.3, p = 0.009). Higher age, greater angular deformity or greater diameter of the humerus were not associated with the increased operation risk.Conclusions: The treatment philosophy concerning pediatric humeral shaft fractures has presented a shift from conservative care to surgical fixation. To authors' understanding there is not evidence supporting the increasing rate of osteosynthesis.