Dual plate fixation on distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus

Anterolateral Dual Plate Fixation for Distal Metaphyseal-Diaphyseal Junction Fractures of the Humerus: Biomechanical Finite Element Analysis with Clinical Results

Background

Distal metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction fractures of the humerus are a subset of injuries between humeral shaft fractures and distal intra-articular humerus fractures. A lack of space for distal fixation and the unique anatomy of concave curvature create difficulties during operative treatment. The closely lying radial nerve is another major concern. The aim of this study was to determine whether anterolateral dual plate fixation could be effective for a distal junctional fracture of the humerus both biomechanically and clinically.

Methods

A right humerus 3-dimensional (3D) model was obtained based on plain radiographs and computed tomography data of patients. Two fractures, a spiral type and a spiral wedge type, were constructed. Three-dimensional models of locking compression plates and screws were constructed using materials provided by the manufacturer. The experiment was conducted by using COMSOL Multiphysics, a finite element analysis, solver, and simulation software package. For the clinical study, from July 2008 to March 2021, a total of 72 patients were included. Their medical records were retrospectively reviewed to obtain patient demographics, elbow range of motion, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores, Mayo Elbow Performance Scores (MEPS), and hand grip strength.

Results

No fracture fixation construct completely restored stiffness comparable to the intact model in torsion or compression. Combinations of the 7-hole and 5-hole plates and the 8-hole and 6-hole plates showed superior structural stiffness and stress than those with single lateral plates. At least 3 screws (6 cortices) should be inserted into the lateral plate to reduce the load effectively. For the anterior plate, it was sufficient to purchase only the near cortex. Regarding clinical results of the surgery, the range of motion showed satisfactory results in elbow flexion, elbow extension, and forearm rotation. The average DASH score was 4.3 and the average MEPS was 88.2.

Conclusions

Anterolateral dual plate fixation was biomechanically superior to the single-plate method in the finite element analysis of a distal junctional fracture of the humerus model. Anterolateral dual plate fixation was also clinically effective in a large cohort of patients with distal junctional fractures of the humerus.

Dual plating in the metastatic distal humerus: Benefits may outweigh the risks

Background

Impending and complete pathologic fractures of the distal humerus are rare complications of metastatic cancer. Surgical treatment aims to quickly restore function and minimize pain. Plate and screw fixation (PSF) is a common method for addressing these lesions, but unlike in orthopaedic trauma, there are no clear guidelines for best management. While dual PSF theoretically provides better support and reduces the chance of reoperation due to tumor progression, single PSF is currently the more common choice.

Materials and methods

Between March 2008 and September 2021, 35 consecutive patients who underwent PSF for distal humerus metastasis or multiple myeloma were retrospectively reviewed. The proportion of patients who developed various postoperative complications, including infection, nonunion, deep vein thrombosis, tumor progression, and radial nerve palsy, as well as those requiring reoperation, was calculated. Mann-Whitney U test, Pearson's chi-squared, and Fisher's exact test were used to investigate differences between the single and dual PSF groups with statistical significance defined as p ≤ 0.05.

Results

There was no significant difference (p = 0.259) in revision rate, although 3 of 21 (14.3 %) single PSF patients required reoperation compared to 0 of 14 (0.0 %) dual PSF patients. The revisions were performed in one patient due to refracture and in two patients due to tumor progression. Although not statistically significant, a larger percentage of single PSF patients developed a postoperative complication compared to dual PSF patients [odds ratio 0.42 (95 % confidence interval 0.071 to 2.5); p = 0.431]. Single PSF did lead to shorter operative time compared to dual PSF [p < 0.001].

Conclusion

Dual PSF is non-inferior to single PSF and potentially results in fewer reoperations and postoperative complications in distal humerus pathologic lesions, although it leads to longer operative time. The current study is limited by small sample size due to the rarity of distal humerus metastatic lesions.

Modified medial minimally invasive double-plating osteosynthesis techniques for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of humerus

The optimal surgical approach and placement of plates for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus are the subjects of debate. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of modified medial minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) techniques using a double technique for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus. A total of 30 patients with a distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus were selected from our hospital. Patients were seen between January 2017 and October 2022. They were treated with a modified medial approach combined with MIPO using a double plate technique. Patient demographics, operation time, bleeding volume, union time, complications, the mean fracture length (FL) and distal cortical length (DCL), and the number of screws in the distal fragment were analyzed. The function of the shoulder and elbow was evaluated using Neer's assessment of the shoulder and Mayo's assessment of the elbow. The FL was 56.1 ± 7.2 mm and the DCL was 38.3 ± 5.3 mm. The mean operative time was 84.8 ± 13.4 min (range 60-110 min). The mean blood loss during surgical treatment was 46.5 ± 10.2 ml (range 30-60 ml). Bone healing was observed in all patients from 10 to 16 weeks (average 12.1 ± 1.7) postoperatively, and one case with poor surgical wound healing was recorded. All the patients had good function of both the shoulder and elbow. The maximum flexibility of the elbow ranged from 130° to 145° (average 138.1 ± 4.8°), with a maximum flexibility straightness ranging from 0° to 5° (average 2.2 ± 1.3°). The Mayo elbow joint function score was 80-100 (average 91.4 ± 5.0). The Neer shoulder joint function score ranged from 85 to 100 (average 92.5 ± 3.9). The modified medial approach was beneficial it did not cause any iatrogenic radial nerve or ulnar nerve injuries. The anterior and the medial side plates are fixed perpendicular to the distal humerus and provide excellent stability at the same time producing better shoulder and elbow joint function.

Humeral shaft fractures: a cost-effectiveness analysis of operative versus nonoperative management

BACKGROUND

Humeral shaft fractures can be managed operatively or nonoperatively with functional bracing in the absence of neurovascular injury, open fracture, or polytrauma. A consensus on optimal management has not been reached, nor has the cost-effectiveness perspective been investigated.

METHODS

A decision tree was constructed describing the management of humeral shaft fractures with open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF), intramedullary nailing (IMN), and functional bracing in a non-elderly population. Probabilities were defined using weighted averages determined from systematic review of the literature. Cost-effectiveness was evaluated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, measured in cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000/QALY and $100,000/QALY were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eighty-six studies were included. Using bracing as the referent in the health care model, we observed that bracing was the preferred strategy at both incremental cost-effectiveness ratio thresholds. ORIF and IMN had higher overall effectiveness (0.917 QALYs and 0.913 QALYs, respectively) compared with bracing (0.877 QALYs). The cost-effectiveness of bracing was driven by a substantially lower overall cost. In the societal model-accounting for both health care and societal costs-the cost difference narrowed between bracing, ORIF, and IMN. Bracing remained the preferred strategy at the $50,000/QALY threshold; ORIF was preferred at the $100,000/QALY threshold. ORIF and IMN were comparable strategies across a range of probability values in sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional bracing, with its low cost and satisfactory clinical outcomes, is often the most cost-effective strategy for humeral shaft fracture management. ORIF becomes preferable at the higher willingness-to-pay threshold when societal burden is considered. QALY values for ORIF and IMN were comparable.

A pilot biomechanical study comparing a novel, intramedullary Nail/Plate construct to standard Dual-Plate fixation of intra-articular C2.3 distal humerus fractures

BACKGROUND

The gold-standard treatment for intra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHFs) is dual-plate/dual-column fixation, though optimal orientation is not yet established. With a superior method not yet identified, we propose a load-sharing construct, combining absolute stability (extramedullary plate fixation) for distal articular fragments and relative stability (load-sharing intramedullary nail) for the metaphyseal segment. The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the biomechanical performance of a novel implant compared to orthogonal dual-plating.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten fresh-frozen matched-pairs of human cadaveric upper extremities with no prior elbow pathology/surgery were used. Pairs were randomized into two groups: Dual-Plate (medial and posterolateral) or novel Nail/Plate (cross-locked medial nail and posterolateral plate). AO/ASIF type 13-C2.3 multifragmentary fractures with simulated metaphyseal comminution. Biomechanical testing included stiffness (MPa) and load to failure (Newtons) in axial (100 cycles at 3 Hz at 20 N increments from 20 to 100 N) and coronal (varus/valgus; 4,000 cycles from 50N-100 N at 3 Hz) planes. Failed specimens were not analyzed and mechanisms were identified. For all failures, mechanisms were identified and reviewed by three consultant surgeons for revision vs. immobilization, to attempt to recreate a real-world scenario. All outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

During stiffness testing, zero Nail/Plate specimens failed, but two (20%) Dual-Plate specimens failed (mechanisms: fracture diastasis; bone collapse and intussusception into osteotomy, yielding articular congruency loss). For remaining samples, Nail/Plate (n = 10) coronal (varus/valgus) stiffness was comparable to Dual-Plate (n = 8) constructs (41.5 vs. 39.0 MPa, p = 0.440). Remaining Dual-Plate constructs had greater axial overall stiffness than Nail/Plate (118.3 ± 48.3 vs. 95.6 ± 34.7 MPa, p = 0.020). Failure loads were comparable between Nail/Plate and Dual-Plate constructs (1,327.8 vs. 1,032.4 N, p = 0.170). Individual nail yield strength ranged from 1,101.1-1,124.4 N (n = 2). In review of all failures, the most common overall mechanism was fracture/osteotomy site posterolateral plate bending. Revision recommendation rate was comparable between constructs (Nail/Plate, 22.2% vs. Dual-Plate, 44.4%, p>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel Nail/Plate construct demonstrated non-inferior coronal (varus/valgus) stiffness, despite producing lower axial stiffness than orthogonal dual-plating, potentially due to the load-sharing cross-locked design. Considering comparable biomechanical performance, with no failures and comparable recommendations for revision, this novel construct warrants further evaluation as an alternative to the gold-standard, dual-plate fixation method for intra-articular distal humerus fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.

Locking versus non-locking plates in fixation of extra-articular distal humerus fracture: a randomized controlled study

INTRODUCTION

Studies have shown that the use of nonlocking (reconstruction) plates in fixing distal humerus fractures may not yield stable fixation which therefore requires long immobilization and suboptimal functional results. There are reports showing that locking plates are biomechanically superior to nonlocking plates. The aim of this study was to compare elbow functional outcomes between locking and nonlocking plates in fixation of distal humerus fractures.

METHODS

A single-centre, randomized control study was conducted at an academic level 1 trauma centre. A total of 60 patients with type 13-A fracture (AO/OTA classification) were randomized into two equal groups, locking plates group, and nonlocking plates group. The primary outcome measure was the Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS) at one year. Secondary outcomes measures were elbow flexion/extension arc, union, operative time, and complications (e.g., infection, heterotrophic ossification).

RESULTS

The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) at one year was 88 ± 10.1 in locking plates group and 75.8 ± 12.8 in nonlocking plates group. The difference was found to be statically significant (P value = 0.01). Elbow flexion/extension arc of motion at one year was 116° ± 15° in locking plates group and 113° ± 28° in nonlocking plates. The difference was not found to be statistically significant (P value = 0.17).

CONCLUSION

Both implants yield similar results, with locking plates showing slightly better clinical scores.

Clinical outcomes of dual 3.5-mm locking compression plate fixation for humeral shaft fractures: Comparison with single 4.5-mm locking compression plate fixation

BACKGROUND

Recently, several in vitro biomechanical studies that used dual small locking plate fixation for humeral shaft fractures have investigated. However, in vivo studies about dual plate fixation for humeral shaft fractures are limited. The purpose of our study was to report the outcomes of dual small plating for humeral shaft fractures in comparison with those of single large fragment plating.

METHODS

Sixty consecutive patients who underwent an open reduction internal fixation for humeral shaft fractures at our institution from September 2014 to December 2017 were included. Single 4.5-mm locking compression plate (LCP) fixation was used in the first 40 cases, and dual 3.5-mm LCP fixation was used in the final 20 consecutive cases. Data were collected to define patient characteristics, injury mechanism, clinical outcomes, time to surgery, operative time, estimated blood loss, and complications. Using simple radiography during the follow-up period (6, 12, 24, and 52 weeks after surgery), the shoulder and elbow joint ranges of motion (ROM) were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Demographic data, time to surgery, surgical time, and estimated blood loss had no significant differences between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in nonunion rate and union rate 3 months after surgery. However, two patients (5%) in the single 4.5-mm LCP fixation group showed metal failure and breakage. No significant differences were found in postoperative shoulder and elbow ROM. Three patients (7.5%) in the single plating group and one patient (5%) in the dual plating group developed radial nerve palsy after surgery. No vascular injury and deep infection were observed in either group.

CONCLUSION

For diaphyseal humeral fractures, dual 3.5-mm LCP fixation to the humerus is a possible treatment choice. This method showed satisfactory union rate, ROM, and complication rate, without increasing surgical time, in comparison with the conventional single 4.5-mm LCP fixation. Level of evidence: III.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Dual Plate Configurations for Femoral Shaft Fracture Fixation

Aim

This study aimed at comparing the mechanical properties of conventional and locking dual plates in adjacent and orthogonal orientations for the surgical fixation of transverse femoral shaft fractures. It also assessed the failure mechanics after dual adjacent and orthogonal locking plate removal.

Methods

Thirty-two composite femurs were transversally osteotomized and randomly assigned for fixation with either dual locking or compression plates in an adjacent or orthogonal configuration. Sixteen specimens were preloaded axially to 20 N and single-leg stance loads were simulated. The remaining sixteen constructs were subjected to torsional loads of 10 Nm at a rate of 10 Nm/s in external and internal rotation of the femoral head in relation to the knee. Overall combined rotational stiffness was calculated. Eight different specimens with no osteotomy underwent the same experiments after dual locked plate removal and were tested to failure in combined eccentric axial and torsional modes. Data were statistically processed using a two-tailed t-test and one-way analysis of variance for the comparison of means between two or more groups, respectively.

Results

Orthogonal constructs were statistically stiffer in axial loading compared to their adjacent counterparts in both conventional and locking configurations (p<0.001). Dual locking plates provided higher torsional stiffness than conventional ones within each plate orientation (p<0.01). Neither axial/torsional strength nor failure loads differed between constructs that had adjacent or orthogonal dual locking plates instrumented and then removed (p>0.05).

Conclusions

In both orthogonal and adjacent orientations, double locking plates provide higher stability than their dual conventional counterparts. Orthogonal dual plate configuration is more stable and biomechanically superior to dual adjacent plating for constructs fixed with either standard compression or locking plates.

Total Elbow Arthroplasty Versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for the Management of Distal Humerus Fractures in the Elderly

Distal humerus fractures, which are challenging injuries seen in geriatric patients, are often repaired using open reduction and internal fixation or total elbow arthroplasty. This updated meta-analysis, which includes more recent open reduction and internal fixation techniques, examined outcomes following distal humerus fractures repaired using open reduction and internal fixation vs total elbow arthroplasty. Although distal humerus fractures treated with total elbow arthroplasty achieved statistically higher functional scores relative to those treated with open reduction and internal fixation, this difference was not clinically significant. Furthermore, the authors found no early difference in the use of either open reduction and internal fixation or total elbow arthroplasty in the management of distal humerus fractures. Choice of treatment should be based on patients' long-term demands and anticipated need for implant longevity. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(1):22-27.].

Antero-lateral minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with the radial nerve exploration for extra-articular distal-third diaphyseal fractures of the humerus

INTRODUCTION

Traditional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of extra-articular distal humerus fractures has a risk of iatrogenic radial nerve injury, extensive soft tissue stripping, and long incision scar. We performed an antero-lateral minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) technique with the radial nerve exploration for distal-third diaphyseal fractures of the humerus and evaluated clinical and radiographic outcomes through this respective study.

METHODS

From April 2010 to June 2016, 28 cases of extra-articular distal-third diaphyseal fractures were treated with an antero-lateral MIPO procedure. Patient demographics, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score, Mayo Elbow Performance (MEP) Score, elbow range of motion, scars and post-operative complications were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

All fractures were united with a mean time of 3.5 months. One patient exhibited delayed union (3.6%). The mean DASH Score was 6.6, and all patients had excellent or good MEP Score values. The average scar length was 6.8 cm, and the shortest was 4.5 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

The MIPO technique via an antero-lateral approach for extra-articular distal-third diaphyseal fractures of the humerus results in satisfactory clinical outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series, treatment study.