Treatment Of Humeral Shaft Fractures Research Articles

Nonoperative Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures With Immediate Functional Bracing Versus Coaptation Splinting and Delayed Functional Bracing: A Retrospective Study.

To compare radiographic and clinical outcomes in nonoperative management of humeral shaft fractures treated initially with coaptation splinting (CS) followed by delayed functional bracing (FB) versus treatment with immediate FB. Retrospective cohort study. Academic Level 1 Trauma Center. Patients with closed humeral shaft fractures managed nonoperatively with initial CS followed by delayed FB or with immediate FB from 2016 to 2022. Patients younger than 18 years and/or with less than 3 months of follow-up were excluded. The primary outcome was coronal and sagittal radiographic alignment assessed at the final follow-up. Secondary outcomes included rate of failure of nonoperative management (defined as surgical conversion and/or fracture nonunion), fracture union, and skin complications secondary to splint/brace wear. Ninety-seven patients were managed nonoperatively with delayed FB (n = 58) or immediate FB (n = 39). Overall, the mean age was 49.9 years (range 18-94 years), and 64 (66%) patients were female. The immediate FB group had less smokers ( P = 0.003) and lower incidence of radial nerve palsy ( P = 0.025), with more proximal third humeral shaft fractures ( P = 0.001). There were no other significant differences in demographic or clinical characteristics ( P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in coronal ( P = 0.144) or sagittal ( P = 0.763) radiographic alignment between the groups. In total, 33 (34.0%) humeral shaft fractures failed nonoperative management, with 11 (28.2%) in the immediate FB group and 22 (37.9%) in the delayed FB group ( P = 0.322). There were no significant differences in fracture union ( P = 0.074) or skin complications ( P = 0.259) between the groups. This study demonstrated that nonoperative treatment of humeral shaft fractures with immediate functional bracing did not result in significantly different radiographic or clinical outcomes compared to treatment with CS followed by delayed functional bracing. Future prospective studies assessing patient-reported outcomes will further guide clinical decision making. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

The outcome of nonoperative treatment for adult humeral shaft fractures using a U-shaped slab in resource-limited settings: a prospective cohort study

BackgroundHumeral shaft fractures, constituting 3–5% of musculoskeletal injuries, are commonly managed conservatively using functional braces. However, this approach may not be feasible in resource-limited settings. This study aimed to evaluate the functional outcomes of nonoperative treatment for humeral shaft fractures in adults utilizing a U-shaped slab.MethodsThis prospective study was conducted from August 2021 to August 2022 involving 16-year-old and older individuals who received nonsurgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures at public tertiary hospitals in Rwanda. The assessment focused on various functional outcomes, including alignment, union rate, range of motion, return to activities of daily living, and DASH score.ResultsThe study included 73 participants, predominantly males (73.9%), with a median age of 33 years. The union rate was high at 89.04%, and 10.96% experienced delayed union. Radial nerve palsy occurred in 4.11% of patients, but all the patients fully recovered within three months. Despite angular deformities during healing in the majority of participants, these deformities did not significantly impact functional outcomes. According to the international classification of disabilities, 77% of participants achieved a good functional grade.ConclusionThe conservative U-shaped slab method was effective at managing humeral shaft fractures. However, optimal results necessitate careful participant selection and comprehensive rehabilitation education. Implementing these measures can improve the overall success of nonoperative management.

Correlation between Peripheric Blood Markers and Surgical Invasiveness during Humeral Shaft Fracture Osteosynthesis in Young and Middle-Aged Patients.

The treatment for humeral shaft fractures (HSFs) is still controversial, consisting of a wide variety of orthopedic osteosynthesis materials that imply different grades of invasiveness. The aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between inflammatory blood-derived markers and the magnitude of the surgical procedure in young and middle-aged patients who sustained these fractures. Observational, retrospective research was conducted between January 2018 and December 2023. It followed patients diagnosed with recent HFSs (AO/OTA 12-A and B) and followed operative treatment. They were split in two groups, depending on the surgical protocol: group A, operated by closed reduction and internal fixation (CRIF) with intramedullary nails (IMNs), and group B, operated by open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with dynamic compression plates (DCPs). Statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) between the two groups could be observed in injury on the basis of surgery durations, surgical times, pre- and postoperative neutrophil-per-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), postoperative platelet-per-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-per-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), systemic inflammatory index (SII), systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI) and aggregate inflammatory systemic index (AISI). The multivariate regression model proposed revealed that NLR > 7.99 (p = 0.007), AISI > 1668.58 (p = 0.008), and the surgical times (p < 0.0001) are strongly correlated to the magnitude of the surgical protocol followed. Using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, a balanced reliability was determined for both postoperative NLR > 7.99 (sensitivity 75.0% and specificity 75.6) and AISI > 1668.58 (sensitivity 70.6% and specificity 82.2%). Postoperative NLR and AISI as inflammatory markers are highly associated with the magnitude of surgical trauma sustained during humeral shaft fracture osteosynthesis in a younger population.

A protocol for the conduct of a multicentre, prospective, randomized superiority trial of surgical versus non-surgical interventions for humeral shaft fractures.

Fractures of the humeral shaft represent 3% to 5% of all fractures. The most common treatment for isolated humeral diaphysis fractures in the UK is non-operative using functional bracing, which carries a low risk of complications, but is associated with a longer healing time and a greater risk of nonunion than surgery. There is an increasing trend to surgical treatment, which may lead to quicker functional recovery and lower rates of fracture nonunion than functional bracing. However, surgery carries inherent risk, including infection, bleeding, and nerve damage. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of functional bracing compared to surgical fixation for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. The HUmeral SHaft (HUSH) fracture study is a multicentre, prospective randomized superiority trial of surgical versus non-surgical interventions for humeral shaft fractures in adult patients. Participants will be randomized to receive either functional bracing or surgery. With 334 participants, the trial will have 90% power to detect a clinically important difference for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire score, assuming 20% loss to follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include function, pain, quality of life, complications, cost-effectiveness, time off work, and ability to drive. The results of this trial will provide evidence regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness between surgical and non-surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Ethical approval has been obtained from East of England - Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee. Publication is anticipated to occur in 2024.

Is Elastic Stable Intramedullary Nailing a Viable Treatment Option for Diaphyseal Fractures of the Humerus in Adults? A 29-case Series Prospective Study.

Humerus shaft fractures are common in orthopaedic practice. The emphasis in treatment has shifted from prolonged immobilisation to early mobilisation and internal fixation when needed for a quicker return to normal function. Internal fixation methods include plate osteosynthesis and intramedullary nailing. This study specifically evaluated the effectiveness of flexible intramedullary nails in treating diaphyseal humeral fractures. Between April 2007 and January 2010, Alexandria University Hospital treated 29 patients (21 males, 8 females) with diaphyseal humeral fractures. Treatment involved closed reduction and percutaneous fixation using two flexible nails. Patients, aged 17 to 65 with a mean age of 32, were included if they did not have pathological fractures, were above 16 years old, and were medically suitable. Causes included pedestrian vehicle accidents (17 cases) and falls or sports-related activities (12 cases). Surgical intervention occurred 1 to 8 days after the injury. Between April 2007 and January 2010, Alexandria University Hospital treated 29 patients (21 males, 8 females) for diaphyseal humeral fractures using closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with two flexible nails. Patients, aged 17 to 65, were monitored for an average of 18 months. Radiographic assessments showed complete union in nineteen fractures within 13 to 21 weeks. One patient experienced non-union but was successfully treated with bone grafting and plating. There were no significant intraoperative complications. Notably, four patients with preoperative radial nerve injuries recovered within 6 to 8 weeks. Evaluation using the Stewart and Hundley Scoring technique showed excellent outcomes for 60% of patients, good outcomes for 30%, fair outcomes for 5%, and poor outcomes for 5%. 1.The Elastic Stable Intramedullary Nailing (ESIN) technique shows promise in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. 2. However, the success of treatment may depend on various factors, including patient age, fracture characteristics, and the presence of complications such as open fractures and radial nerve palsy. 3. Careful consideration of these factors is necessary when selecting a treatment approach for humeral shaft fractures.

Clinical efficacy analysis of minimally invasive intramedullary nailing in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures combined with radial nerve injury.

The aim of this study was to research the therapeutic effectiveness of radial nerve damage paired with a humeral shaft fracture and intramedullary nailing. Retrospective research was performed on the medical records of 58 individuals who had humeral shaft fractures and radial nerve injuries. The admission period was between June 1, 2020, and June 31, 2022. All study subjects that satisfied the requirements for inclusion were separated, using the random number table approach, into two groups: one for internal fixation (group N), which included 29 cases, and one for minimally invasive procedures (group W), which included 29 patients. Group W received minimally invasive intramedullary nail treatment, and group N received internal fixation with compression plates. The changes in the clinical effects, surgery-related indicators, joint function, nerve function, and levels of stress indicators of the two groups of treatment were analyzed. The changes in adverse reactions and satisfaction of patients were compared. The effective rate of group W was 89.66% (26/29), and that of group N was 72.41% (21/29). Although group W's effective rate was higher than group N's, there was no discernible disparity between the two groups (p>0.05). Surgical blood loss and incision length were much smaller in group W than in group N, and overall operation duration and length of stay were considerably shorter in group W than in group N (p<0.05). The excellent and good rate of elbow joint function in group W was 93.10% (27/29), whereas the excellent and good rate of group N was 65.52% (19/29). The excellent and good rate of elbow joint function in group W was considerably greater than that of group N (p<0.05). In group W, the excellent and good rate of shoulder joint was 96.55% (28/29), and that in group N was 68.97% (20/29), and group W had a considerably greater probability of excellent shoulder joint function than group N (p<0.05); the excellent and good rate of neurological function was 82.76% (24/29) in group W and 58.62% (17/29) in group N, and group W had much greater rates of excellent and good neurological function than group N (p<0.05). prostaglandin E-2 (PGE2), C-reactive protein (CRP) and Substance P (SP) levels in the W group and the N group were substantially higher after the surgery than they were prior to it (p<0.05), and in the W group, the aforementioned stress markers were much lower than they were in the N group (p<0.05). Group W experienced a 3.45% (1/29) rate of adverse events, while group N saw a 24.14% (7/29) incidence. The incidence of adverse responses was substantially lower in group W than in group N (p<0.05). The contentment rate of group W was 93.10% (27/29), and that of group N was 72.41% (21/29). Group W had a much greater contentment percentage than group N (p<0.05). Minimally invasive intramedullary nailing is a successful therapeutic approach for humeral shaft fractures with radial nerve damage, which may successfully enhance patients' shoulder and elbow joint function and nerve function, reduce patients' stress response, and has the characteristics of minimal adverse responses and high contentment, which is worthy of popularization and deployment.

Shoulder problems after percutaneous antegrade intramedullary nailing in humeral diaphyseal fractures using contemporary straight third-generation nail.

Antegrade intramedullary nailing in humeral shaft fracture has been abandoned by certain orthopedic surgeons because of rotator cuff injury caused by first- and second-generation intramedullary nails (IMNs). However, only a few studies have specifically addressed the results of antegrade nailing for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures with a straight third-generation IMN; thus, complications need to be re-evaluated. We hypothesized that fixation of displaced humeral shaft fractures with a straight third-generation antegrade IMN with the percutaneous technique avoid shoulder problems (stiffness and pain) incurred by first- and second-generation IMNs. This was a retrospective, single-center, nonrandomized study of 110 patients with a displaced humeral shaft fracture between 2012 and 2019 treated surgically with a long third-generation straight IMN. Mean follow-up was 35.6 months (range, 15-44 months). There were 73 women and 37 men with a mean age of 64.7±19 years. All fractures were closed (37.3% 12A1, 13.6% 12B2, and 13.6% 12B3 AO/OTA classification). Mean Constant score was 82±19, Mayo Elbow Performance Score 96±11 and the mean EQ-5D visual analog scale score was 69.7±21.5. Mean forward elevation 150°±40°, abduction 148°±45°, and external rotation 38°±15°. Symptoms associated with rotator cuff disease were present in 6.4%. Evidence of radiographic fracture healing was detected in all but 1 case. One postoperative nerve injury and 1 adhesive capsulitis were present. Overall, 6.3% underwent second surgeries (4.5% were minor surgeries like hardware removal). Percutaneous antegrade intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures with a straight third-generation nail considerably reduced complications related to shoulder problems and achieved good functional results.

Percutaneous helical plate fixation in humeral shaft fractures with proximal extension

BackgroundHumeral shaft fractures with extension to the proximal third are increasingly frequent and technically more demanding. Surgical management of proximal metaphyseal junction humeral fractures is challenging. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, reproducibility, and possibility of early and completed rehabilitation in the percutaneous treatment with helical plates in humeral shaft fractures with proximal extension. Patients and methodsThis was a descriptive, retrospective, single-centre cohort study based on consecutive patients with proximal metaphyseal junction humeral fractures (MIPO-helical-plate-Broggi's cohort). Surgical technique (minimally invasive approach and osteosynthesis): percutaneous treatment with a twisted plate (helical plates). Study variables: i): Intraoperative and postoperative (up to 1 year after surgery) safety; ii) Reproducibility of the surgical technique [number (percentage) of patients with surgical technique success]. The surgical technique success was defined as the recovering without neurovascular, implant failures and infection issues after one year follow up; and iii) Early and completed (3 months) rehabilitation [number (percentage) of patients]. A descriptive analysis was performed. ResultsBetween April 2010 to January 2022, we received 443 humeral shaft fractures at our unit. Of these, 350 fractures were treated surgically. 157 (44.9%) were treated using the minimally invasive approach and osteosynthesis technique with extramedullary implants, of which 46 (46/157, 29.3%, 9 men and 37 women) were performed with almost orthogonally twisted Philos® helical plates. The median (range) age was 67 (51–94) years. Study outcomes: i) Safety: None intraoperative events were gathered. No neurovascular, implant failure and infection issues were reported one year after surgery.; ii) Reproducibility of the surgical technique: only 1 failure (2%, 95%CI:0–11%), who was reoperated; and iii) Early and 3 month of rehabilitation was completed in 45 (98%, 95%CI:89–100%) patients. Forty-five (98%, 95%CI:89–100%) patients recovered their previous function the year after surgery. ConclusionsThe treatment of humeral shaft fractures with proximal extension based on a minimally invasive approach and osteosynthesis: percutaneous treatment with a twisted plate (helical plates), as this is a submuscular and extraperiosteal technique, is a safe and reproducible technique, and promotes early rehabilitation. In our opinion, it is surgical technique whose main requirement is a good knowledge of topographic anatomy.

Unchanged incidence but change in treatment trends from 1996 to 2018: 23,718 humeral shaft fractures from the Danish National Patient Registry.

Humeral shaft fractures (HSF) can be treated surgically or non-surgically. National trends and distributions are sparsely reported. We present the temporal trends in epidemiology of adult HSF in Denmark, with the primary aim of reporting HSF incidences, and the secondary aim of reporting on the primary treatment management. The diagnosis (International Classification of Diseases Version 10 [ICD-10]: S42.3) and surgical procedure codes for HSF were obtained from the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) covering 1996-2018. The diagnosis code for HSF is validated in the DNPR with a positive predictive value of 89%. Patients aged 18 years and above were included. Surgical treatment was defined as a diagnosis of HSF combined with a surgical procedure within 3 weeks of injury. Cases without relevant registered procedures within 3 weeks were defined as nonsurgical treatment cases. 23,718 HSF (62% female) were identified in the DNPR. The overall mean incidence was 25/100,000/year and was stable over 23 years. The population above 50 years accounted for 78% of all HSF. Non-surgical treatment accounted for 87% of treatments and was stable during the study period. Temporal changes were observed regarding surgical procedures; intramedullary nailing decreased from 57% to 26% and plate osteosynthesis increased from 12% to 69%. The overall incidence for HSF remained stable from 1996 to 2018. Most cases were females aged 50 years and above. The preferred primary treatment for HSF was non-surgical for all ages. Plate osteosynthesis became more popular than intramedullary nailing over the study period.

Operative and Nonoperative Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Decision-making with regard to the treatment of humeral shaft fractures remains under debate. The cost-effectiveness of these treatment options has yet to be established. This study aims to compare the cost-effectiveness of operative treatment with that of nonoperative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. We developed a decision tree for treatment options. Surgical costs included the ambulatory surgical fee, physician fee, anesthesia fee, and, in the sensitivity analysis, lost wages during recovery. We used the Current Procedural Terminology codes from the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery to determine physician fees via the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services database. The anesthesia fee was obtained from the national conversion factor and mean operative time for included procedures. We obtained data on mean wages from the U.S. Bureau of Labor and data on weeks missed from a similar study. We reported functional data via the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores obtained from existing literature. We used rollback analysis and Monte Carlo simulation to determine the cost-effectiveness of each treatment option, presented in dollars per meaningful change in DASH score, utilizing a $50,000 willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold. The cost per meaningful change in DASH score for operative treatment was $18,857.97 at the 6-month follow-up and $25,756.36 at the 1-year follow-up, by Monte Carlo simulation. Wage loss-inclusive models revealed values that fall even farther below the WTP threshold, making operative management the more cost-effective treatment option compared with nonoperative treatment in both settings. With an upward variation of the nonoperative union rate to 84.17% in the wage-exclusive model and 89.43% in the wage-inclusive model, nonoperative treatment instead became more cost-effective. Operative management was cost-effective at both 6 months and 1 year, compared with nonoperative treatment, in both models. Operative treatment was found to be even more cost-effective with loss of wages considered, suggesting that an earlier return to baseline function and, thus, return to work are important considerations in making operative treatment the more cost-effective option. Economic and Decision Analysis Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Evaluation of Humeral Shaft Fracture Outcomes by Treatment Method: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Based on Comparison Studies.

The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate various outcomes of humeral shaft fractures treated with different treatment methods, which included functional bracing, open reduction and internal fixation, intramedullary nailing, and locked compression plate. A systematic review was performed using research databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Keywords relating to treatment of humeral shaft fractures were used, and comparison studies that reported patient characteristics and outcomes, including nonunion, malunion, function scores, and complications, were included. One hundred fourteen records were screened, with 18 studies ultimately included in the meta-analysis. Treatment groups were consolidated into brace or surgery and then further categorized into subgroups based on surgical technique used. Postoperative events, complications, and functional scores were compared among the treatment groups. Statistical analysis for this study was conducted using Review Manager 5.3, with a standard p-value of ≤0.05 for statistical significance. Eighteen studies were included in this review with a total of 706 patients. Z-tests showed that risks of revision, nonunion, and malunion were higher in the brace treatment group compared with the surgical treatment group (p < 0.0001, <0.0001, 0.004, respectively). Risk of infection was expectedly higher in the surgical group compared with the brace group (p = 0.04). Radial nerve injury rates were also higher in the unspecified surgical group compared with the brace group (p = 0.01). In the surgical group, the mean Constant shoulder score was also significantly higher than that in the brace group (p = 0.004). When comparing the nail and plate groups, Z-tests revealed higher risks of delayed unions and other complications in the nail group (p = 0.04 and 0.001, respectively) but higher risk of infection in the plate group (p = 0.05). The conservative treatment of humeral shaft fractures with functional braces may be associated with a lower incidence of infection and nerve injury when compared with operative treatment methods. However, nonoperative treatment may also come with higher risks of revision, nonunion, and malunion than the many available surgical modalities. Operative management with either intramedullary nail or plate has shown to be a reliable method of management with reasonable outcomes for humeral shaft fractures. While the nail group had higher risk of delayed unions and other complications, the plate group had higher risk of infections. Both nail and plate surgical treatments have shown to result in high union rates and should be considered by the surgeon on a case-by-case basis when treating humeral shaft fractures. Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Conservative Management with Functional Brace Versus Various Surgical Fixation Techniques for Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Network Meta-Analysis.

Historically, humeral shaft fractures have been successfully treated with nonoperative management and functional bracing; however, various surgical options are also available. In the present study, we compared the outcomes of nonoperative versus operative interventions for the treatment of extra-articular humeral shaft fractures. This study was a network meta-analysis of prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which functional bracing was compared with surgical techniques (including open reduction and internal fixation [ORIF], minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis [MIPO], and intramedullary nailing in both antegrade [aIMN] and retrograde [rIMN] directions) for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. The outcomes that were assessed included time to union and the rates of nonunion, malunion, delayed union, secondary surgical intervention, iatrogenic radial nerve palsy, and infection. Mean differences and log odds ratios (ORs) were used to analyze continuous and categorical data, respectively. Twenty-one RCTs evaluating the outcomes for 1,203 patients who had been treated with functional bracing (n = 190), ORIF (n = 479), MIPO (n = 177), aIMN (n = 312), or rIMN (n = 45) were included. Functional bracing yielded significantly higher odds of nonunion and significantly longer time to union than ORIF, MIPO, and aIMN (p < 0.05). Comparison of surgical fixation techniques demonstrated significantly faster time to union with MIPO than with ORIF (p = 0.043). Significantly higher odds of malunion were observed with functional bracing than with ORIF (p = 0.047). Significantly higher odds of delayed union were observed with aIMN than with ORIF (p = 0.036). Significantly higher odds of secondary surgical intervention were observed with functional bracing than with ORIF (p = 0.001), MIPO (p = 0.007), and aIMN (p = 0.004). However, ORIF was associated with significantly higher odds of iatrogenic radial nerve injury and superficial infection than both functional bracing and MIPO (p < 0.05). Compared with functional bracing, most operative interventions demonstrated lower rates of reoperation. MIPO demonstrated significantly faster time to union while limiting periosteal stripping, whereas ORIF was associated with significantly higher rates of radial nerve palsy. Nonoperative management with functional bracing demonstrated higher nonunion rates than most surgical techniques, often requiring conversion to surgical fixation. Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

Effectiveness and Safety of Traditional Open Reduction and Internal Fixation vs. Intramedullary Nailing in the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures

Effectiveness and Safety of Traditional Open Reduction and Internal Fixation vs. Intramedullary Nailing in the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures

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.

Six Examples with Different Means of Operative Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fracture

We showed different cases and operative treatment of traumatic fractures of humeral shaft including operative treatment by means of external fixation, intramedullary fixation with long humeral nailing, intramedullary fixation with Rush nail and plate osteosynthesis. The indications were chosen according to fracture anatomy and biology but foremost by specific socioeconomic comorbidities and aspects of the patient itself. Bone healing status, postoperative local status, neurocirculatory status, postoperative physical therapy course and overall functional results of injured limb and patient satisfaction.

Distal locking technique affects the rate of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures

BackgroundIntramedullary humeral nailing is a common and reliable procedure for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Radial nerve palsy is a common complication encountered in the treatment of this pathology. The radial nerve runs from posterior to anterior at the lateral aspect of the distal humerus. Hence, there is reason to believe that due to the anatomic vicinity of the radial nerve in this area, lateral–medial distal locking in intramedullary nailing of the humerus may be associated with a greater risk for iatrogenic radial nerve injury compared to anterior–posterior locking.Questions/purposeTo assess whether the choice of distal locking (lateral–medial versus anterior–posterior distal locking) in intramedullary humeral nailing of humeral shaft fractures affects the risk for iatrogenic radial nerve injury.Patients and methodsOverall, 203 patients (116 females, mean age 64.3 ± 18.6 years), who underwent intramedullary nailing of the humerus between 2000 and 2020 at a single level-one trauma center, met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this retrospective case–control study. Patients were subdivided into two groups according to the distal locking technique.ResultsAnterior–posterior locking was performed in 176 patients versus lateral–medial locking in 27 patients. We observed four patients with iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in both groups. Risk for iatrogenic radial nerve palsy was almost 7.5 times higher for lateral–medial locking (OR 7.48, p = 0.006). There was no statistically significant difference regarding intraoperative complications, union rates or revision surgeries between both groups.ConclusionsLateral–medial distal locking in intramedullary nailing of the humerus may be associated with a greater risk for iatrogenic radial nerve palsy than anterior–posterior locking. Hence, we advocate for anterior–posterior locking.Level of evidenceLevel III retrospective comparative study.

Fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized clinical trials of surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures: A systematic review.

BACKGROUNDDespite recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there remains no consensus regarding the preferred surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures. The fragility index (FI) is an emerging tool used to evaluate the robustness of RCTs by quantifying the number of participants in a study group that would need to switch outcomes in order to reverse the study conclusions. AIMTo investigate the fragility index of randomized control trials assessing outcomes of operative fixation in proximal humerus fractures. METHODSWe completed a systematic review of RCTs evaluating the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Inclusion criteria included: articles published in English; patients randomized and allotted in 1:1 ratio to 2 parallel arms; and dichotomous outcome variables. The FI was calculated for total complications, each complication individually, and secondary surgeries using the Fisher exact test, as previously published. RESULTSFifteen RCTs were included in the analysis comparing open reduction plate osteosynthesis with dynamic compression plate or locking compression plate, intramedullary nail, and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. The median FI was 0 for all parameters analyzed. Regarding individual outcomes, the FI was 0 for 81/91 (89%) of outcomes. The FI exceeded the number lost to follow up in only 2/91 (2%) outcomes. CONCLUSIONThe FI shows that data from RCTs regarding operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures are fragile and does not demonstrate superiority of any particular surgical technique.

Dynamic Compression Plating Versus Interlocking Nail Procedure for Fracture Shaft of Humerus; A Comparative Study

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of dynamic compression plating against interlocking nail technique for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial Place &amp; Duration: Department of Orthopedic, Mardan Medical Complex, Mardan for the period of two years from April 2020 to October 2021. Methods: Fifty six patients (18-65 years old) of both sexes were included in the study because they had a humeral shaft fracture. The patients were randomly split into two groups. Both the dynamic compression plating group (n = 28) and the interlocking nail group (n = 28) received treatment. Radiographic examination both before and after surgery were performed. At the 12-day post-operative, complications following the operation were observed. The NEERs criteria were used to analyse the results of the functional assessments. Follow-up was taken at 6 months postoperatively. Results: Mean age of patients was 41.46±10.74 years. 42 (75%) patients were males while 25% were females. Road traffic accident was the most common cause found in 37 (66.07%) patients. Mean union time in DCP and INL group was 11.62±3.05 and 13.54±4.73 weeks. Shoulder stiffness was the commonest complication in both groups. At final follow up, in DCP group 24 (85.71%), 2 (7.14%) and 2 (7.14%) patients had excellent, good and fair outcomes, while in group B (INL) 19 (67.86%), 5 (17.86%) and 4 (14.29%) patients had excellent, good and fair outcomes. No significant difference was found in both groups regarding functional outcomes. Patients satisfaction was high in DCP group as compared to INL. Conclusion: Dynamic compression plating shows better outcomes in term of union time, complications and functional outcomes as compared to interlocking nail Technique. Keywords: Dynamic Compression Plating, Interlocking Nailing, Fracture Shaft of Humerus