Displaced humeral shaft fractures: Assessment of fracture union and complications following dual plate fixation using an anterior approach.

The humeral bone is subject to torsional forces. In case of displaced shaft fractures, internal fixation remains the standard of care. This retrospective two-center study assessed the fracture union rate and complications after dual 3.5 mm locking compression plate (LCP) fixation using an anterolateral approach. Over a 9-year period, 38 patients underwent surgery in two centers. They had a mean age of 53.7 years (15-97, ± standard deviation (SD) 26) and there were three open fracture cases (7.9 %). The dominant side was affected in 21 cases (55.3 %) and there were 11 polytrauma patients (29 %). Mean operative time was 78 min (40-124, ± 19.8 SD). Patients were treated with dual 3.5 mm LCP fixation (6 screws on either side of the fracture line, anterolateral approach without a tourniquet). The first two orthogonal views showing at least 3 cortical bridges out of 4 determined fracture healing, as assessed by two independent raters. Pre- and postoperative complications were tabulated. Clinical outcomes included range of motion (ROM) and return to activities, while functional outcomes were assessed with the Disability of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH), the Constant score, the Subjective Shoulder Score (SSV) and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS). Minimum follow-up was 1 year. Four patients were given a shoulder immobilizer to wear for 3 weeks; immediate mobilization was the standard of care for the other patients. Fracture union was achieved in all cases within a mean of 11.7 weeks (6-28 ± 7.1 SD) without any heterotopic ossification of the brachialis muscle. There were eight patients with preoperative radial nerve palsy and two cases of postoperative palsy. There was one surgical site infection (2.6 %). Return to work for active patients was possible in 87 % of cases within a mean of 23 weeks (6-72 ± 11 SD). The Constant score was 84.6 (35-100, ± 13.4 SD), the SSV score was 80.7 (60-100, ± 8.2 SD), the DASH score was 13.5 (0-38.3, ± 8.8 SD) and the MEPS score was 85 (55-100, ± 11.9 SD). Traditional fixation methods provide little control over torsional forces, leading to non-union rates between 3 % and 12 % and delayed union (12 to 20 weeks). The simplicity of the technique described here, and the short operative time, may help explain the low infection rate. Dual plate fixation makes it possible to use more screws and allows nerve exploration and decompression in case of preoperative nerve palsy. Dual plate fixation to treat humeral shaft fractures is a simple and reliable technique.

Combining robotics and 3D printing facilitates closed reduction of humeral shaft fractures using a minimally invasive plate as a reduction template: A proof-of-concept study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fractures (HSFs) has limitations due to malreduction and radiation exposure. To address these limitations, we integrated robotics and 3D printing by incorporating plates as reduction templates. METHOD: The innovative technology facilitated closed reduction of HSFs in the operating theatre using 18 models with cortical marking holes. The dataset of the precontoured plate was imported into 3D planning software for virtual fixation and screw path planning. The models were divided into half to simulate transverse fractures. During the operation, the software generated drilling trajectories for robot navigation, and precise plate installation achieved automatic fracture reduction. RESULTS: The evaluation results of reduction accuracy revealed variations in length, apposition, alignment, and rotation that meet the criteria for anatomic reduction. High interoperator reliabilities were observed for all parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed technology achieved anatomic reduction in simulated bones.

Trends in reported outcomes and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in humeral shaft fracture literature: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: With a lack of standardization among outcome measures in fracture literature, cross-study comparisons remain limited. This systematic review aimed to identify trends in outcome measures reported by studies of the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: A systematic review was performed of studies reporting clinical outcomes of humeral shaft fractures indexed in PubMed. Extracted data included demographics, fracture characteristics, treatment modalities, outcomes, patient reported outcome measures (PROMs), and journal characteristics. Cochran-Armitage tests and linear regressions were used to identify data trends. Pearson chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparisons between studies. RESULTS: This review included 197 studies with outcomes of 15,445 humeral shaft fractures. 126 studies reported PROMs and 37 different PROMs were used. The Constant Score was most commonly reported (34% of studies), followed by ASES Score (21%), MEPS (21%), and DASH Score (20%). There was a significant increase in PROM usage over time (p = 0.016) and in articles using three or more PROMs (p = 0.005). The number of PROMs were significantly greater in prospective cohort studies and RCTs (p = 0.012) compared to retrospective cohort studies and case series (p = 0.044 for both). Post-treatment shoulder motion was reported in 43% of studies and 34% reported elbow motion. 86% of studies reported complications as an outcome parameter. Time to union and nonunion rate were published in 69% and 88% of studies, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study identified increasing PROM usage over time and disparities in the reporting of outcomes in humeral shaft fracture literature requiring further validation and standardization of available outcome measures.

Anatomic Reversal of Shoulder Joint After Neck of Humerus Fracture.

We report on a singular case of a unique form of post-traumatic reversal of the humeral head after humeral neck fracture, in which the pattern of collapse resulted in the formation of a native reverse polarity shoulder. In essence, the humeral head became a socket, and the glenoid rounded to become a head with well-preserved shoulder function. To our knowledge, this is the first case of an acquired shoulder deformity that bears a remarkable functional similarity to a prosthetic reverse polarity shoulder replacement.

Risk factors of poor mid-term shoulder functional outcomes of osteosynthesis using antegrade intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Osteosynthesis using antegrade intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures yields satisfactory bone union rates; however, it may adversely affect postoperative shoulder function. To date, factors affecting mid- or long-term shoulder functional outcomes following intramedullary nail fixation have not been clarified. In this study, we aimed to identify the risk factors for poor mid-term functional outcomes over 5 years postoperatively following antegrade intramedullary nail osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 33 patients who underwent surgery using an antegrade intramedullary nail for acute traumatic humeral shaft fractures and were followed up for at least 5 years postoperatively. We divided the patients into clinical failure and no clinical failure groups using an age- and sex-adjusted Constant score of 55 at the final follow-up as the cutoff value. We compared preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative factors between the two groups. RESULTS: Five of the 33 patients had poor shoulder functional outcomes (adjusted Constant score < 55) at a mean follow-up of 7.5 years postoperatively. Proximal protrusion of the nail at the time of bone union (P = 0.004) and older age (P = 0.009) were significantly associated with clinical failure in the univariate analyses. Multivariate analysis showed that proximal protrusion of the nail (P = 0.031) was a risk factor for poor outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study provide new information on predictive factors affecting mid-term outcomes following osteosynthesis using antegrade nails. Our results demonstrated that proximal protrusion of the nail was significantly associated with poor mid-term functional shoulder outcomes. Therefore, particularly in older adults, it is essential to place the proximal end of the intramedullary nail below the level of the articular cartilage.

Does double distal locking reduce non-union rates in intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fracture?

INTRODUCTION: Intramedullary nailing is one of the surgical treatments for humeral shaft fracture. Non-union is a common complication, with rates of 10-20%. The objective of this study was to compare non-union in humeral shaft fractures treated by intramedullary nailing with double distal locking, single distal locking or no locking. HYPOTHESIS: Nailing with double distal locking decreases non-union rates compared to single or no locking. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This single-center retrospective comparative study included 87 patients with closed humeral shaft fracture without neurologic deficit treated by anterograde intramedullary nailing: group 1 (double locking): 15 fractures; group 2 (single locking): 63 fractures; group 3 (no locking): 9 fractures. Non-union was defined as absence of radiographic callus at 6 months without clinical pain. The primary endpoint was non-union rate per group. The secondary endpoints were Constant score at 6 months, and postoperative use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in non-union rate: 20.0% in group 1, 20.3% in group 2, and 0% in group 3 (p=0.32). Constant score at 6 months was significantly different between the 3 groups (p=0.01). Group 2 used more NSAIDs than the other groups (39.1% vs. 20.0% in group 1 and 33.3% in group 3; p=0.37). DISCUSSION: Non-union rates were similar regardless of distal locking for closed humeral shaft fractures without neurologic deficit treated by intramedullary nailing. Nevertheless, patients in the double locking group had higher Constant scores at 6 months, probably related to greater stability of fixation, allowing more efficient rehabilitation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; retrospective comparative study.

Iatrogenic open humeral shaft fractures following functional bracing.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of closed humeral shaft fractures tends to be successful with functional bracing. Treatment failure due to iatrogenic conversion to an open fracture has not been described in the literature. We present a case series of patients that experienced open humeral shaft fractures after initially being treated with functional bracing for closed humeral shaft fractures and describe what factors are associated with this complication. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective case series performed at three level 1 trauma centers across North America. All nonoperatively treated humeral shaft fractures were reviewed from 2001 to 2023. Patients were included if they sustained a humeral shaft fracture, > 18 years old, were initially treated non-operatively with functional bracing which subsequently converted to an open fracture. Eight patients met inclusion criteria. All included patients were eventually treated with irrigation, debridement, and open reduction and internal fixation. Outcomes assessed included mortality rate, time until the fracture converted from closed to open, need for further surgery, and bony union. Descriptive statistics were used in analysis. RESULTS: The eight included patients on average were 65 ± 21.4 years old and had a body mass index (BMI) of 25.6 ± 5.2. Six patients were initially injured due to a fall. Time until the fractures became open on average was 5.2 ± 3.6 weeks. Three patients (37.5%) died within 1.8 ± 0.6 years after initial injury. The average Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score was 4.5 ± 3.4. Three patients (37.5%) had dementia. Common characteristics among this cohort included a history of visual disturbances (50.0%), cerebrovascular accident (50.0%), smoking (50.0%), and alcohol abuse (50.0%). CONCLUSION: Conversion from a closed to open humeral shaft fracture after functional bracing is a potentially devastating complication. Physicians should be especially cognizant of patients with a low BMI, history of falling or visual disturbance, dementia, age ≥ 65, decreased sensorimotor protection, and significant smoking or alcohol history when choosing to use functional bracing as the final treatment modality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Biomechanical comparison of composite and cadaveric humeri models in experiments on operated humeral shaft fractures.

A study was undertaken to determine how well contacting fracture fragments of composite bone replicated the behavior of fracture fragments in real bone. Ten composite and ten real humeral diaphyses were transected and reconstructed with limited-contact dynamic-compression plates. Two screws were placed on each side of the transection site and a calibrated electronic sensor sheet was placed between the imitated fracture fragments. After insertion of the distal screws, pressure measurements were made during insertion of the first proximal screw in compression mode, during insertion of the second screw in compression mode after loosening the first screw, and finally after retightening the first screw. The process was repeated after bending the plate. The contact area, the net compression force and the average compressive stress were computed and statistically compared. The composite bone and cadaveric bone differed in contact area and compressive stress but not in net compressive force. Plate bending did not produce a significant difference between composite and cadaveric bone. The results indicate that composite bone does not reproduce all the local fracture fragment conditions so that hardware testing in composite bone should proceed carefully. A gap between fracture fragments as is often used in comminuted fracture tests may remain as the most appropriate situation for fracture hardware testing.

Intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures: percutaneous nailing in the lateral position through the Neviaser approach is a reliable technique.

BACKGROUND: Displaced humeral shaft fractures are frequently treated by osteosynthesis in the active patient. We aimed to evaluate the results of intramedullary nailing (IMN) in the lateral position with the Neviaser approach and to compare them with those from IMN nailing in the standard position and conventional approach. METHODS: In the retrospectively evaluated, single-center study, we compared 20 cases of long IMN for fractures of the proximal or middle third of the humerus shaft (Multilock; Synthes Laboratory) in the lateral position with the percutaneous Neviaser approach with 52 cases of IMN in the standard position. The mean age of patients was 62 ± 21 years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed: Constant score, subjective shoulder evaluation score and range of motion. Radiographically, entry point at the proximal part of the humerus, the healing rate and the possible association between the critical shoulder angle (CSA) and the correct positioning of the nail were assessed. RESULTS: With a mean follow-up of 26 ± 2 months, the healing rate was 89% (64/72) in the overall series, (eight patients in non-union), with no difference between the two groups. The overall mean active anterior elevation (AAE) was 125 ± 22°, mean external rotation (ER1) was 35 ± 17°, and mean internal rotation (IR) was at L3. The mean Constant score was 58 ± 23 and subjective shoulder evaluation score 73 ± 12%. ranges of motion were better in the lateral than standard position group (AAE 133 ± 17 vs. 122 ± 23, P = .03; ER1 47 ± 13 vs. 30 ± 16, P < .001; IR T12 vs. L5, P = .02). The nail was less often protruding in the lateral than standard position group (1/20 [5%] vs. 20/52 [38.5%], P = .002). The nail was better positioned from the anteroposterior view (nail centered: 16/20 [75%] vs. 26/52 [50%], P = .047) and lateral view (nail centered: 18/20 [90%] vs. 34/52 [65.4%], P = .02) in the lateral than standard position group. We found no association between nail position, type of approach and CSA. CONCLUSIONS: In the short-term follow-up, osteosynthesis of humeral shaft fractures by using long IMN in the lateral position with the Neviaser approach is a reliable technique. The positioning of the nail, in particular its entry point, and the clinical results were better with the lateral position and Neviaser approach than with the standard position and conventional approach. Further studies with a larger number of patients, assessment of the learning curve, and analysis of the impact of this technique on comorbidities (unchanged cerebral perfusion) are needed to fully validate this technique.

Comparative study of mechanical performance of various fixation constructs in multifragmentary distal humeral shaft fracture: a finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: There has been no scientific mechanical assessment demonstrating the optimal fixation technique in multifragmentary fractures of the distal humeral shaft. The purpose of the present study was to compare the biomechanical performance of 5 fixation constructs as used in minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis (MIPO) for distal humeral shaft fractures. METHODS: Three-dimensional (3D) humerus model with 20 mm distal humeral shaft fracture gap simulating multifragmentary fracture was created from computed tomography data and virtually fixed by 5 fixation techniques as MIPO, i.e., anterior narrow dynamic compression plate (DCP), anterior narrow locking compression plate (LCP), anterior reversed proximal humeral internal locking system (R-PHILOS), extra-articular distal humerus locking compression plate (LCP-EADH), and anteromedial LCP. All constructs were biomechanically tested under 6 loading conditions by means of finite element analysis, i.e., 250-N axial compression, 7.5-N m internal rotation, 7.5-N m external rotation, 10-N m posterior bending, 10-N m valgus rotation, and 10-N m varus rotation. In addition, A 3D model of each construct was fabricated as 3D printed models. Fixations were applied to the 3D printing model which were later mechanically tested to validate the FE results. RESULTS: EQV stress exhibited on anterior narrow LCP and anterior R-PHILOS were comparable which were lower than other constructs under axial compression and valgus-varus bending. Anterior R-PHILOS produced lower EQV stress than other constructs under internal-external rotation and posterior bending. On the whole, R-PHILOS demonstrated a comparable fracture displacement to those LCP with anterior or anteromedial approaches, that achieved the lowest displacement values. In addition, the experimental mechanical test values shared a correlation with the FE model results. CONCLUSION: Overall, the anterior R-PHILOS was considered as a potential candidate for multifragmentary distal humeral shaft fractures. It demonstrated efficacious biomechanical performance in terms of implant stress and distal fragment displacement.

Percutaneous helical plate fixation in humeral shaft fractures with proximal extension.

BACKGROUND: Humeral 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 METHODS: This 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. RESULTS: Between 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. CONCLUSIONS: The 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.

Minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis for the dislocated humeral head fracture associated with ipsilateral humeral shaft fracture: A case report.

The condition combining a dislocated humeral head fracture and an ipsilateral humeral shaft fracture is seen to be rare in literature, which is limited to case report or case series. Furthermore, effective management of these coexistent injuries is still a subject of debate. The essential purpose of this article is to report another treatment method for this condition. We present a case of a 79-year-old female patient who suffered a three-part humeral head fracture-dislocation associated with the ipsilateral humeral shaft fracture. The combined injuries were managed by minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) through the deltopectoral approach with the eventual result of bone healing and good function after thirty-three months of follow-up. In conclusion, MIPO should be considered a safe and effective option, however, the risk of traumatic osteonecrosis of the humeral head is taken into account before operation decision-making.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Humeral Shaft Fracture Management and Its Outcomes.

Background and objective The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated a sudden and drastic shift in patient management throughout the healthcare system, to curb the spread of the disease and deal with resource limitations. Many surgical cases were canceled or delayed with only the most urgent and emergent cases taken up for treatment. It is unknown if and how these alterations affected patient outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare time to fracture care and outcomes between patients treated for humeral shaft fractures prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and those treated during the pandemic. We hypothesized that the pandemic cohort would have a prolonged time to fracture care and worse outcomes than the pre-pandemic cohort. Materials and methods This was a retrospective cohort study performed within a single healthcare system. All humeral shaft fractures treated from March to June 2019 (pre-pandemic cohort) and March to June 2020 (pandemic cohort) were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes and ICD-10-CM codes as well as Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Data on demographics, fracture characteristics, treatment, and outcomes were collected via chart and radiograph review. Outcomes analyzed included time to being made weight-bearing as tolerated (WBAT), radiographic union, and final follow-up; range of motion (ROM) at radiographic union and final follow-up; and rate of complications. Results The pre-pandemic cohort (n=19) was significantly younger with a mean age of 29 years than the pandemic cohort (n=17) with a mean age of 49 years (p=0.010). There were no other significant differences in demographics, fracture characteristics, or treatment type between the groups. Time to fracture care was not significantly different in the pre-pandemic cohort (five days) versus the pandemic cohort (four days). Time to being made WBAT, radiographic union, and final follow-up were not significantly different between the pre-pandemic (86, 113, and 98 days) and the pandemic cohorts (77, 106, and 89.5 days). ROM measurements in abduction at radiographic union were significantly different between the cohorts: in the pre-pandemic cohort, 100% of patients reached greater than 160 degrees; in the pandemic cohort, only 16.7% of patients reached greater than 160 degrees (p=0.048). There was a non-significant decrease in the proportion of patients who achieved the maximal category of ROM measurements in forward elevation and extension at radiographic union and abduction, forward elevation, and extension at final follow-up, as well as a non-significant increase in visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at final follow-up between cohorts. There were no significant differences in the rate of complications. Conclusions Despite limited resources, reduced operating room availability, and increased utilization of virtual visits due to the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with humeral shaft fractures may not have faced delays in fracture care or worse outcomes compared to the pre-pandemic period. The pandemic cohort may have experienced significantly decreased ROM compared to the pre-pandemic cohort, which may reflect the decreased availability of physical therapy services and overall decreased activity levels due to the quarantine orders. However, we could not identify any other significant differences in the type of treatment, pain, complications, or time to union.

Advantages of simultaneous radial nerve and tendon reconstruction - a case report.

Transection of the radial nerve is frequently associated with humeral shaft fractures that are part of a very complex upper extremity injury. In the presented case, a 19-year-old man with a 10-cm radial nerve defect with a need for nerve grafting to recover complete sensory and motor deficit of the radial nerve. In our case, at the same time we provided the tendon transfer of musculus (m.) pronator teres to m. extensor carpi radialis brevis, m. flexor carpi ulnaris to m. extensor digitorum communis, m. palmaris longus to m. extensor pollicis longus, and long sural nerve graft because of an extensive zone of the injury. The assumption was that if these two procedures are performed in one surgery, it will accelerate overall recovery, restore the functionality of the upper limb more quickly, and thus enable a faster recovery.

Validation of the Radiographic Union Score for HUmeral fractures (RUSHU): A retrospective study in an independent centre.

Background: Early diagnosis and fixation of fractures unlikely to unite can prevent months of morbidity. The Radiographic Union Score for Humeral fractures (RUSHU) is a summative scoring system developed to aid identification of patients at higher risk of developing humeral shaft non-union. Plain radiographs taken six weeks after injury are given a score between four and 12 based on signs of union. Our aim was to assess the validity of the RUSHU prognostic model in an external population. Methods: The radiographs of fifty-seven patients were scored independently according to RUSHU methodology by three reviewers (blinded to patient outcome). Interobserver intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated. Results: Of the cohort, six (10.5%) progressed to non-union after six months. We observed an interobserver ICC co-efficient of 0.89 (95%CI0.84,0.93) in RUSHU score at six weeks. Median score was significantly higher in the union cohort (10v5 p < 0.001). Using the score of < 8 to predict non-union gave an area under the ROC curve of 0.87 (95%CI 0.83,0.90). Conclusions: In this retrospective single-centre study, we have demonstrated good inter-rater reliability. We would suggest that the RUSHU model be assessed in further external validation studies. RUSHU has the potential to reduce morbidity of delayed treatment of non-union.

Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of two different surgical approaches, the anterolateral and posterior approaches, for treating humeral shaft fractures. MATERIALS AND METHODS:  Between January 2015 and May 2021, 51 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with anterolateral and posterior approaches. Twenty-nine patients were operated with the posterior approach (group 1) and 22 with the anterolateral approach (group 2). Statistical analyses were performed between the two groups regarding age, gender distribution, fractured side, body mass index (BMI), type of trauma, Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification, and follow-up time. Complications such as operative time, amount of bleeding, incision length and implant fracture, radial nerve palsy, wound infection, and nonunion were compared between the two groups. Functional results of the elbow joint were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. RESULTS:  The mean follow-up period was 49.10±21.15 months (12-75 months) in group 1 and 50.00±23.71 months (range: 15-70 months) in group 2. There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of age, gender distribution, fractured side, BMI, trauma type, AO/OTA classification, and follow-up time (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and incision length (p>0.05). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.24±20.03 (range: 70-100 points) in group 1 and 81.36±8.34 (range: 70-100 points) in group 2, and no significant difference was found (p>0.05). When evaluated in terms of complications, there was no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). While there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding elbow joint range of motion, the limitation was observed in more patients in group 1. CONCLUSION:  Similar satisfactory treatment results were obtained in patients who underwent anterolateral and posterior approaches in treating humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, no difference was found between the two approaches regarding complication rates.

Treatment of humeral shaft fractures with different treatment methods: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Humeral shaft fractures (HSFs) can be treated non-operatively (Non-OP), with open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), or with intramedullary nails (IMN). However, the best treatment for HSFs still remains controversial.We performed a network meta-analysis to explore which should be the best method for HSFs. METHODS: The computerized search had been conducted on electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Medline from the establishment of the database to the end of December 2022. The quality evaluation of the included literature had been completed by Review Manager (version 5.4.1). Stata 17.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA)was used for network meta-analysis.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments to treating HSFs. RESULTS: The pairwise comparison results demonstrated that there was no statistical difference between IMN, MIPO, Non-OP, and ORPO in terms of radial nerve injury and infection, and Non-OP presented significantly more nonunion than ORPO, IMN, and MIPO. However, no statistically significant difference between ORPO, IMN, and MIPO was discovered. The results of the network meta-analysis displayed that surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities of IMN, MIPO, Non-OP, and ORPO in radial nerve injury were 46.5%, 66.9%, 77.3%, and 9.3%, respectively, in contrast, that in infection were 68.6%, 53.3%, 62.4%, and 15.4%, respectively, and that in nonunion were 51.7%, 93.1%, 0.7%, and 54.5%, respectively. CONCLUSION: We came to the conclusion that MIPO is currently the most effective way to treat HSFs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Name of the registry: Prospero, 2. Unique Identifying number or registration ID: CRD42023411293.

Outcome and complication comparison for intramedullary nail versus open reduction internal fixation in humeral diaphyseal fractures for 2800 matched patient pairs utilizing the Nationwide Readmissions Database.

INTRODUCTION: Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and intramedullary nail fixation (IMN) are the predominant repair methods for operative treatment of humeral diaphyseal fractures; however, the optimal method is not fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to analyze whether IMN or ORIF humeral diaphyseal surgeries result in a significantly higher prevalence of adverse outcomes and whether these outcomes were age dependent. We hypothesize there is no difference in reoperation rates and complications between IMN and ORIF for humeral diaphyseal fractures. METHODS: Data collected from 2015 to 2017 from the Nationwide Readmissions Database were evaluated to compare the prevalence of six adverse outcomes: radial nerve palsy, infections, nonunion, malunion, delayed healing, and revisions. Patients treated for a primary humeral diaphyseal fracture with either IMN or ORIF were matched and compared (n = 2,804 pairs). Patients with metastatic cancer were excluded. RESULTS: Following an ORIF procedure, there was a greater odds of undergoing revision surgery (p = 0.03) or developing at least one of the complications of interest (p = 0.03). In the age-stratified analysis, no significant differences were identified in the prevalence of adverse outcomes between the IMN and ORIF cohorts in the 0-19, 20-39, and 40-59 age groups. Patients who were 60 + had 1.89 times the odds of experiencing at least one complication and 2.04 times the odds of undergoing a revision after an ORIF procedure versus an IMN procedure (p = 0.03 for both). DISCUSSION: IMN and ORIF for humeral diaphyseal fractures are comparable in regard to complications revision rates in patients under the age of 60. Meanwhile, patients 60 + years show a statistically significant increase in the odds of undergoing revision surgery or experiencing complications following an ORIF. Since IMN appears to be more beneficial to older patients, being 60 + years old should be considered when determining fracture repair techniques for patients presenting with primary humeral diaphyseal fractures.

Retrospective multicenter (TRON group) study of humeral shaft fragility fractures: Analysis of mortality rates and risk factors.

AIMS: This study aimed to show the mortality rate following humeral shaft fragility fractures (HSFF) in the elderly. The secondary aim was to examine the predictors associated with mortality in elderly patients who have sustained HSFF. METHODS: From 2011 to 2020, all elderly patients aged 65 years and older with HSFF managed at our nine hospitals were retrospectively identified from our TRON database. Patient demographics and surgical characteristics were extracted from medical records and radiographs, and multivariable Cox regression analysis was used to identify factors affecting mortality. RESULTS: In total, 153 patients who sustained HSFF were included. The mortality rate for HSFF in the elderly was 15.7% at 1 year and 24.6% at 2 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis showed significant differences in survival for the following variables: older age (p < 0.001), underweight (p = 0.022), severely ill (p = 0.025), mobility limited to indoors (p = 0.003), dominant-side injury (p = 0.027), and nonoperative treatment (p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: The outcome following HSFF in the elderly population appears to be relatively grim. The prognosis of elderly patients with HSFF is closely related to their medical history. In the elderly patients with HSFF, operative treatment should be positively considered while taking into account their medical status.