Fixation Of Humeral Shaft Fractures Research Articles

A clinical study on robot navigationassisted intramedullary nail treatment for humeral shaft fractures

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the advantages of robot navigation system-assisted intramedullary nail treatment for humeral shaft fractures and compare it’s efficacy with that of traditional surgical intramedullary nail treatment.Materials and methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients with humeral shaft fractures who received intramedullary nail treatment at our centre from March 2020 to September 2022. The analysis was divided into a robot group and a traditional surgical group on the basis of whether the surgery involved a robot navigation system. We compared the baseline data (age, sex, cause of injury, fracture AO classification, and time of injury-induced surgery), intraoperative conditions (surgery time, length of main nail insertion incision, postoperative fluoroscopy frequency, intraoperative bleeding), fracture healing time, and shoulder joint function at 1 year postsurgery (ASES score and Constant–Murley score) between the two groups of patients.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the baseline data or average fracture healing time between the two groups of patients. However, the robotic group had significantly shorter surgical times, longer main nail incisions, fewer intraoperative fluoroscopies, and less intraoperative blood loss than did the traditional surgery group (P < 0.001).ConclusionRobot navigation system-assisted intramedullary nail fixation for humeral shaft fractures is a reasonable and effective surgical plan. It can help surgeons determine the insertion point and proximal opening direction faster and more easily, shorten the surgical time, reduce bleeding, avoid more intraoperative fluoroscopy, and enable patients to achieve better shoulder functional outcomes.

Development of the humeral head offset index for control of humeral torsion

BackgroundControl of humeral torsion can present a challenge, especially intraoperatively during closed reduction and fixation of humeral shaft fractures or 2-part surgical neck fractures of the proximal humerus. The objective of this study is to develop and validate an indirect method for the assessment of humeral torsion using an index that is linearly correlated with rotational arm position and can be derived from only a single plain radiographic image of the proximal humerus.MethodsThe Humeral Head Offset Index (HHOI) is calculated as the ratio of the medial and lateral offset of the humeral head measured from the outer cortices of the shaft on a plain radiographic or fluoroscopic image. The relationship of HHOI with humeral torsion was first verified on a sawbone model with radiopaque characteristics under fluoroscopic control. Different degrees of retroversion were simulated through manual rotation of the humerus with a digital protractor in 5° increments until 40° internally rotated and then in 5° increments until 40° externally rotated from the neutral position. The same procedure was subsequently performed digitally on Digitally Reconstructed Radiographs (DRRs) from computed tomography (CT) dataset of the sawbone. Next, the HHOI index was applied to eight randomly selected patients with total humerus CT using the same method. Spearman’s rho was calculated for the bivariate analysis of correlation between the simulated degree of retroversion and the HHOI. Strength of correlation was classified according to Koo and Li. Interrater and intrarater reliability of three blinded observers with repetition of measurement after three months were analyzed by assessing the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).ResultsBoth in the sawbone model and in DRRs, we demonstrated a high to very high significant linear correlation between simulated retroversion and the HHOI. ICC values demonstrated excellent interrater reliability and excellent intrarater reliability for measurement of the HHOI.ConclusionsThe HHOI is a new, simple, reliable index that has a linear relationship to the rotation of the humerus and can therefore allow an indirect control of humeral torsion in comparison to the contralateral side.

Are patients without insurance coverage less likely to undergo surgery for humeral shaft fractures? A national database analysis

Historically, humeral shaft fractures have been managed nonoperatively in a functional brace. However, recent studies suggest an increase in rates of operative fixation. Disparities in surgical management based on insurance status have been demonstrated across many orthopedic conditions. This study aimed to identify if a correlation exists between insurance coverage and the probability of undergoing operative fixation for a humeral shaft fracture. A retrospective examination of the National Readmissions Database from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. Patients diagnosed with isolated closed humeral shaft fractures were identified via International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision codes, and surgical interventions were identified using International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision procedural codes. Utilizing weighted data, a total of 56,468 patients with isolated closed humeral shaft fractures were identified, 25,075 (44.4%) of whom underwent operative fixation. A univariate analysis was conducted using Pearson's chi-square test to isolate variables for inclusion in a multivariable analysis. A binary logistic regression analysis was then employed to explore demographic and other pertinent factors. Findings were reported as odds ratios. After controlling for social and demographic variables, patients with Medicaid (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.50-0.58; P<.001), Medicare (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.68; P<.001), and self-pay patients (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67-0.84; P<.001) were less likely to undergo operative fixation of humeral shaft fracture than those with private insurance. Patients without private insurance or those with no insurance coverage are less likely to undergo operative fixation for humeral shaft fractures compared to those with private insurance, even after adjusting for social and demographic variables. The observed variability underscores the necessity for more refined treatment guidelines for humeral shaft fractures. Surgeons should be aware of these potential biases affecting management decisions.

Greater Socioeconomic Deprivation is Associated with Increased Complication Rates and Lower Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Humeral Shaft Fractures.

This study explored the hypothesis that social determinants of health (SDOH), including racial and economic differences, may impact orthopaedic trauma outcomes in patients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of humeral shaft fractures. Design: Retrospective. Single, academic, tertiary Level-I trauma center. Adults with midshaft humerus fractures (AO/OTA 12) treated operatively with plate fixation from 05/2011 to 05/2021 with a minimum follow-up of nine months. Radiographic fracture healing, complication rates, and patient-reported outcomes were investigated. SDOH were assessed using the Area Deprivation Index (ADI). Demographics, complications rates, and patient-reported clinical outcomes were compared between the first and fourth ADI quartiles. 196 patients fit the study criteria. The average age of the cohort was 47 years with 50 women (51%). Comparisons of the least deprived quartile (n=49) to the most deprived quartile (n=49) yielded similar sex distribution (59% vs 43% female, p=0.15), fewer non-white patients (8% vs 51%, p<0.01), older average age (51 years vs 43 years, p=0.05), similar BMI (30.5 vs. 31.8, p=0.45), and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (2.2 vs.1.1, p=0.03). While nonunion rates were similar (p=0.20) between groups, the most deprived quartile had 2.3 times greater odds of post-operative complications (p=0.04). Patients in the most deprived group exhibited higher PROMIS Pain Interference (PI) scores (p<0.01) and PROMIS Depression (D) scores (p=0.01), with lower PROMIS Physical Function (PF) scores (p<0.01) at 6-month follow-up than the least depriver cohort. The most deprived cohort had three times higher odds of missing scheduled appointments within the first post-operative year (p<0.01), resulting in a significantly higher no-show rate (p<0.01) than the least deprived cohort. Regression analysis including several demographic and injury factors identified that ADI was significantly associated with the occurrence of any missed appointments (p<0.01), no-show rates (p=0.04), and experiencing one of the following post-operative complications during recovery: Nonunion, radial nerve injury, or dysfunction (p=0.03). Patients experiencing greater resource deprivation faced increased odds of complications, missed appointments, and poorer PROMIS outcomes following humeral shaft fracture fixation, emphasizing that baseline socioeconomic disparities predict unfavorable post-operative outcomes even given favorable baseline health status according to the CCI score. Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Systematic review of humeral shaft fracture (OTA/AO 12) complicated with iatrogenic radial nerve injury

ObjectivesTo compare the iatrogenic radial nerve injury (iRNI) rate of different implant (plate vs. intramedullary nail) and surgical approaches during humeral shaft fracture surgery.MethodsThe online PubMed database was used to search for articles describing iRNI after humeral fracture with a publication date from Jan 2000 to October 2023. The following types of articles were selected: (1) case series associating with adult humeral shaft fracture, preoperative radial nerve continuity, non-pathological fracture and non-periprosthetic fracture; (2) involving humeral shaft (OTA/AO 12) fractures. Articles where we were unable to judge surgical approach or fracture pattern (OTA/AO 12) were excluded. The data were analyzed by SPSS 27.0 and Chi-square test was performed to identify incidence of iRNI associated with different implant and surgical approaches.ResultsFifty-four articles with 5063 cases were included, with 3510 cases of the plate, 830 cases of intramedullary nail and 723 cases of uncertain internal fixation. The incidences of iRNI with plate and intramedullary nail were 5.95% (209/3510) and 2.77% (23/830) (p < 0.05). And iRNI incidences of different surgical approaches were 3.7% (3/82) for deltopectoral approach, 5.74% (76/1323) for anterolateral approach, 13.54% (26/192) for lateral approach and 6.68% (50/749) for posterior approach. The iRNI rates were 0.00% (0/33) for anteromedial MIPO, 2.67% (10/374) for anterolateral MIPO and 5.40% (2/37) for posterior MIPO (p > 0.05). The iRNI rates were 2.87% (21/732) for anterograde intramedullary nail and 2.04% (2/98) for retrograde intramedullary nail (p > 0.05). In humeral bone nonunion surgery, the rate of iRNI was 15.00% (9/60) for anterolateral approach, 16.7% (2/12) for lateral approach and 18.2% (6/33) for posterior approach (p > 0.05).ConclusionIntramedullary nailing is the preferred method of internal fixation for humeral shaft fractures that has the lowest rate of iRNI. Compared with anterolateral and posterior approaches, the lateral surgical approach had a higher incidence of iRNI. The rate of iRNI in MIPO was lower than that in open reduction and internal fixation.Level of evidenceLevel IV.

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.