Humeral shaft fractures: national trends in management

Outcomes of Intramedullary Nailing Versus Plate Fixation in the Management of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the outcomes of intramedullary nailing (IMN) and open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) in treating traumatic humeral shaft fractures in adults (18 years and above). A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). The primary outcome was time to union, while secondary outcomes included non-union rates, incidences of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy, surgical site infections, and intra-operative comminution. Twenty-six studies, encompassing 1,674 patients (867 IMN, 807 ORIF), were included. IMN demonstrated a shorter time to union compared to ORIF (mean difference -1.06 (95% CI, -1.88 to -0.23)), with significant statistical heterogeneity (I² = 70%), and a mean difference of -2.14 (95% CI, -3.16 to -1.12) in the randomized controlled trial (RCT) subgroup analysis, which had no significant statistical heterogeneity. Both techniques had comparable non-union rates (risk ratio 0.34 (95% CI, 0.94 to 1.93)). IMN was associated with lower incidences of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy (risk ratio 0.48 (95% CI, 0.27 to 0.87)) and surgical site infections (risk ratio 0.44 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.76)), but had a higher risk of intra-operative comminution (risk ratio 3.04 (95% CI, 1.24 to 7.44)). The studies exhibited significant heterogeneity and varying outcome measures, highlighting the need for cautious interpretation. IMN offers rapid fracture stabilization and minimal additional physiological insult, while ORIF remains preferable for achieving precise anatomical reduction. These findings highlight the importance of considering patient-specific factors and surgical expertise in selecting the appropriate fixation technique.

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

BACKGROUND

Historically, humeral shaft fractures have been managed nonoperatively in a functional brace. However, recent studies suggest an increase in rates of operative fixation. Disparities in surgical management based on insurance status have been demonstrated across many orthopedic conditions. This study aimed to identify if a correlation exists between insurance coverage and the probability of undergoing operative fixation for a humeral shaft fracture.

METHODS

A retrospective examination of the National Readmissions Database from 2016 to 2021 was conducted. Patients diagnosed with isolated closed humeral shaft fractures were identified via International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision codes, and surgical interventions were identified using International Classification of Disease, 10th Revision procedural codes. Utilizing weighted data, a total of 56,468 patients with isolated closed humeral shaft fractures were identified, 25,075 (44.4%) of whom underwent operative fixation. A univariate analysis was conducted using Pearson's chi-square test to isolate variables for inclusion in a multivariable analysis. A binary logistic regression analysis was then employed to explore demographic and other pertinent factors. Findings were reported as odds ratios.

RESULTS

After controlling for social and demographic variables, patients with Medicaid (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.50-0.58; P < .001), Medicare (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.60-0.68; P < .001), and self-pay patients (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.67-0.84; P < .001) were less likely to undergo operative fixation of humeral shaft fracture than those with private insurance.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients without private insurance or those with no insurance coverage are less likely to undergo operative fixation for humeral shaft fractures compared to those with private insurance, even after adjusting for social and demographic variables. The observed variability underscores the necessity for more refined treatment guidelines for humeral shaft fractures. Surgeons should be aware of these potential biases affecting management decisions.

Trends in Epidemiology and Treatment of Humerus Fractures in the United States, 2017-2022

Background Fractures of the humerus are one of the more common fractures in the United States and a cause of fragility fractures in the elderly population. This study aims to understand recent trends in the demographic factors correlated with humeral shaft fractures (HSF) and humeral shaft fracture nonunion (HSFN) following open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN). Methods The TriNetX database was used to query using International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD10) diagnosis codes for patients who sustained HSF between 2017 and 2022. Patients were then organized into cohorts based on Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 24515 and 24516 for ORIF and IMN of HSFs, respectively. Subsequent nonunion after operative management was queried. Descriptive and comparative analysis was performed to examine the differences observed between patients based on age, sex, ethnicity, race, and smoking status as well as surgical management across the six-year study period. Results The incidence of HSF increased from 7,108 in 2017 to 8,450 in 2022. The rate of HSF ORIF increased from 12% to 17% while the nonunion rate following ORIF decreased from 4% to 3%. The rate of HSF IMN increased from 4% to 6% and the rate of nonunion following IMN increased from 2% to 4%. The overall rate of HSFN surgery was 1.7% with slight decreasing trend over the past year. Conclusion It is speculated that improved care and surgical indications resulted in a lower rate of nonunion despite an increase in the overall rate of HSF and its operative managements.

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

OBJECTIVES

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.

METHODS

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic Level 1 Trauma Center.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

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.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

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.

RESULTS

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.

CONCLUSIONS

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.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Management of Humeral Shaft Fracture: A Network Meta-Analysis of Individual Treatment Modalities

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to perform a network meta-analysis of level I and II evidence comparing different management techniques to define the optimum treatment method for humeral shaft fractures (HSFs).

METHODS

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of the literature using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library was screened from 2010 to 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Inclusion criteria were evidence level I or II studies comparing nonoperative and/or operative repair techniques including open reduction internal fixation plate osteosynthesis (ORIF-Plate), minimally invasive percutaneous plating (MIPO), and intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation for the management of HSFs (OTA/AO 12A, B, C).

DATA EXTRACTION

The risk of bias and methodologic quality of evidence were assessed according to the guidelines designed by the Cochrane Statistical Methods Group and Cochrane Methods Bias Group.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Network meta-analysis was conducted with a frequentist approach with a random-effects model using the netmeta package version 0.9-6 in R.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies (1908 patients) were included. MIPO resulted in the lowest complication rate (2.1%) when compared with ORIF-Plate (16.1%) [odds ratio (OR), 0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.04-0.49]. MIPO resulted in the lowest nonunion rate (0.65%) compared with all management techniques (OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08-0.98), whereas Non-Op resulted in the highest (15.87%) (OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.98-6.11). MIPO demonstrated the lowest rate of postoperative radial nerve palsy overall (2.2%) and demonstrated a significantly lower rate compared with ORIF-Plate (OR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.07-0.71, P = 0.02). IMN resulted in the lowest rate of deep infection (1.1%) when compared with ORIF-Plate (8.6%; P = 0.013). MIPO resulted in a significantly lower Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (3.86 ± 5.2) and higher American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (98.2 ± 1.4) than ORIF-Plate (19.5 ± 9.0 and 60.0 ± 5.4, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The results from this study support that surgical management results in better postoperative functional outcomes, leads to higher union rates, reduces fracture healing time, reduces revision rate, and decreases malunion rates in patients with HSFs. In addition, MIPO resulted in statistically higher union rates, lowest complication rate, lowest rate of postoperative radial nerve palsy, and lower intraoperative time while resulting in better postoperative Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores when compared with nonoperative and operative (ORIF and IMN) treatment modalities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Going Solo: Techniques for Emergency Fracture Management Without Assistance

Orthopaedic injuries represent some of the most frequent conditions treated in emergency centers worldwide. Proper reduction techniques and evaluation of radiographic parameters are paramount in treating patients effectively. Orthopaedic providers at large tertiary centers may have several assistants available but are also burdened by notable patient loads and volumes. Frequently, fracture care may necessitate procedures performed by providers without the availability of skilled assistance, both in large tertiary academic centers and small independent emergency rooms with limited resources. As providers at a busy level 1 tertiary trauma center with only one primary orthopaedic resident responsible for the performance of most fracture reductions, we present both novel techniques and refined published approaches that allow the safe, efficient, and reliable reduction and stabilization of several different types of fracture dislocations with limited or no assistance, and only commonly found supplies.

Augmented Fixation in Transverse Midshaft Humerus Fractures Using a Nitinol Staple: Surgical Technique and Case Series

Maintaining the reduction of a transverse humeral shaft fracture can be particularly challenging while applying a compression plate for definitive fixation. Nitinol compression staples are being increasingly utilized in orthopedic surgery due to their unique ability to apply continuous compression between staple legs at body temperature. We have found them to be particularly useful in the maintenance of the reduction of transverse humeral shaft fractures before compression plate application. This simple technique allows for the removal of reduction clamps and precise plate placement. We describe our technique for using nitinol compression staples to augment fracture fixation in transverse humeral shaft fractures as well as our experience using this technique in a case series of 4 patients.

Four-screw compression plate fixation for diaphyseal humerus fractures

While many humeral shaft fractures can be successfully treated with nonoperative management, compression plating techniques using at least three or four screws on either side of the fracture are the current gold standard. We hypothesized that a less rigid construct using compression with only two screws on either side of the fracture can provide adequate strength for uneventful fracture union. This is a retrospective review of all the patients who underwent open reduction and compression plate fixation for acute diaphyseal humerus fractures (ADHFs) at an academic Level-1 urban trauma center between 2018 and 2023. Patients treated with compression plating using only two screws and three or four plate-holes on either side of the fracture (Group 1) were matched one-to-one with patients treated using the conventional number of screws (three or more on either side of the fracture - Group 2). The incidence of nonunion/malunion, infection, and implant failure was compared among the two groups. There were eleven matched patients in both groups. The nonunion, infection complications, and hardware failure rates were 0% and 9.1% for the control group (Group 2) and four-screw group (Group 1) respectively. This difference was not statistically significant (p = 1.00). Although convention dictates the use of six or more bicortical screws (at least three bicortical screws on each side of the fracture), four-screw bicortical fixation may be a feasible option for ADHFs treated with large fragment compression plating techniques.

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

BACKGROUND

Humeral 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.

METHODS

This 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.

RESULTS

The 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.

CONCLUSION

The 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.

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

Aims

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.

Methods

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.

Discussion

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.

Comparing the Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Humeral Shaft Fractures by Treatment Type

PURPOSE

Humeral shaft fractures are common orthopedic injuries, representing 1-5% of all fractures. There is conflicting literature regarding the superiority of operative versus nonoperative treatment of these fractures. The purpose of this study was to examine functional outcomes and time to radiographic union in humeral shaft fractures with the hypothesis that both would be improved in patients treated operatively relative to those treated nonoperatively.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study examined patients with humeral shaft fractures treated at a single large healthcare system between 2010 and 2020. A chart and radiograph review were performed to collect information on demographics, fracture, treatment, and outcome information. These measures were compared between patients treated operatively and nonoperatively.

RESULTS

Five hundred seventeen adult patients meeting inclusion criteria were identified; 233 were treated nonoperatively, and 284 were treated operatively. The mean patient age was 50.2 years in those who underwent surgery relative to 59.9 years in those treated without surgery (P<0.001). Operatively-treated patients had significantly faster time to radiographic union at a median of 113 days compared to a median of 161 days in nonoperatively-treated patients (P=0.001). The operative group was made weight-bearing as tolerated significantly faster than the nonoperative group (84 days versus 98 days, respectively, P=0.002). No statistically significant difference was seen between the two treatment groups in rates of complications or range of motion at the time of radiographic union. However, patients who underwent surgery were found to be up to two times more likely to achieve full shoulder forward elevation by the time of their final follow-up than those treated without surgery (P=0.011).

CONCLUSION

Patients with humeral shaft fractures treated operatively have faster time to union, earlier weight bearing, and no change in the rate of complications compared to patients treated nonoperatively.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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).

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSION

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.

Racial Disparities in the Operative Management of Orthopedic Trauma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate if race is associated with the likelihood of operative management of acute fractures.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to identify studies associated with social disparities and acute orthopedic trauma. Peer-reviewed studies commenting on social disparities and the decision to pursue operative or non-operative management of acute fractures were identified for detailed review. Study characteristics and odds ratios were extracted from each article. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A quality analysis of the data was also performed.

RESULTS

In total, 13 studies were identified and 8 were included in the meta-analysis totaling 743,846 fractures. Hip, distal radius, pelvic, tibial plateau, clavicle, femoral neck, and femoral shaft fractures were represented in this patient population. The meta-analysis demonstrated that White race is associated with a higher likelihood of operative intervention compared to all other races pooled together (odds ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval 1.16 to 1.47; p < .0001) as well as Black race (odds ratio 1.39; 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.72; p = .0025).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-White race and Black race are associated with a lower likelihood of receiving surgical management of acute orthopedic trauma. Surgeons and health systems should be aware of these inequities and consider strategies to mitigate bias and ensure all patients receive appropriate and timely care regardless of race.

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

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

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.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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%.

CONCLUSION

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.

Proximal fracture line extension in humeral shaft fractures

Introduction

Humeral shaft fractures are common injuries treated by orthopaedic surgeons. The purpose of this study is to evaluate displaced diaphyseal humerus fractures and describe the incidence and characteristics associated with non or minimally displaced fracture line extension into the proximal metadiaphyseal region of the humerus.

Methods and materials

All adult patients with diaphyseal humeral shaft fractures located within the distal two-thirds of the humeral shaft, treated at a single level I trauma institution between 2007 and 2020, were retrospectively identified. 202 patients with 203 fractures of the humeral shaft were included. Fracture patterns were classified according to AO/OTA classification and fracture line extension into the proximal metadiaphyseal region was evaluated on radiographs. Patient demographics, management details, and radiographic outcomes were obtained from review of the electronic medical record.

Results

Of 203 diaphyseal humerus fractures, 11.8 % (n = 24) had non or minimally displaced proximal extension of their main fracture line. This included 43.7 % (n = 7) of all proximal third junction diaphyseal fractures, 10.7 % (n = 16) of all middle third diaphyseal fractures, and 2.6 % (n = 1) of all distal third diaphyseal fractures. Patients with proximal fracture extension were, on average, older (61.7 versus 44.4 years, p < 0.001), and a higher percentage were female (75 % versus 45.5 %, p < 0.01) compared to patients without fracture proximal extension. Fractures with proximal extension were all closed fractures (n = 24), were more often sustained from low-energy fall (87.5 % versus 35.2 %, p < 0.001), and were more often spiral type fractures (62.5 % versus 17.2 %). Fractures with proximal extension were more often treated non-operatively (58.3 % versus 42.1 %, p < 0.01), but were found to have a higher rate of nonunion after non-operative treatment (17.6 % versus 8.1 %) compared to fractures without proximal extension. All operatively treated fractures that had proximal metaphyseal extension were secured with a fixation construct to achieve fixation proximal to the extent of the fracture line, most often into the humeral head and neck. Operative management with proximal fixation into the humeral head was also pursued for a patient with nonunion, including persistent lucency of the proximal extension line, after failed non-operative treatment. Mean follow-up was 35.5 weeks (range: 0-607 weeks).

Conclusions

Proximal fracture line extension in the setting of diaphyseal humerus fractures is not uncommon. Detection and consideration of this sometimes subtle finding is important when planning to treat these injuries operatively.

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.

[Therapy of Humeral Shaft Fractures]

Humeral shaft fractures are a rare but challenging entity of injuries of the upper extremity. Despite all advances in the past decades - including improved imaging, adjusted surgical techniques and new implant designs - the treatment of humeral shaft fractures and especially the treatment choice remains challenging. Treatment options need to be evaluated individually under consideration of fracture morphology, soft tissue and potential neurological damage as well as patient-specific factors (i.e., age, comorbidities). Moreover, the risk of common complications such as radial nerve palsy, infection, non-union and malrotation needs to be evaluated in order to facilitate the best possible therapy for each patient. The regular available treatment options include conservative (cast, brace, etc.) and surgical measures (ante- and retrograde nailing, angle-stable plate osteosynthesis). Furthermore, (temporary) external fixation remains an option in emergency and complicative cases. However, none of the aforementioned options have proven a superior gold standard. This review evaluates the currently available treatment options and their individual advantages as well as the probability of possible complications and is aiming to supply a guide for individual treatment choice.

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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I . 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

BACKGROUND

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSION

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 OF EVIDENCE

Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Humerus fractures: selecting fixation for a successful outcome

Current evidence suggests at least one-third of humeral shaft fractures initially managed nonoperatively will fail closed treatment, and this review highlights surgical considerations in those circumstances. Although operative indications are well-defined, certain fracture patterns and patient cohorts are at greater risk of failure. When operative intervention is necessary, internal fixation through an anterolateral approach is a safe and sensible alternative. Determining which patients will benefit most involves shared decision-making and careful patient selection. The fracture characteristics, bone quality, and adequacy of the reduction need to be carefully evaluated for the specific operative risks for individuals with certain comorbid conditions, inevitably balancing the patient's expectations and demands against the probability of infection, nerve injury, or nonunion. As our understanding of the etiology and risk of nonunion and symptomatic malunion of the humeral diaphysis matures, adhering to the principles of diagnosis and treatment becomes increasingly important. In the event of nonunion, respect for the various contributing biological and mechanical factors enhances the likelihood that all aspects will be addressed successfully through a comprehensive solution. This review further explores specific strategies to definitively restore function of the upper extremity with the ultimate objective of an uninfected, stable union.

Assessment of Intraoperative Rotational Alignment of Closed Locked Intramedullary Nailing for Humerus Fractures

Intramedullary nailing of humerus fractures has evolved over the past half century and has grown in popularity especially for the polytraumatized patient. The importance of restoring appropriate rotational alignment is equivalent to that of restoring sagittal and coronal alignment to decrease the risk of shoulder degenerative changes and limit range of motion discrepancy from the contralateral limb. This technique is designed to introduce an intraoperative fluoroscopic method to obtain adequate rotational alignment of humeral shaft fractures treated with closed antegrade humeral locked nailing.

Humeral shaft fracture: systematic review of non-operative and operative treatment

INTRODUCTION

Humeral shaft fractures can be treated non-operatively or operatively. The optimal management is subject to debate. The aim was to compare non-operative and operative treatment of a humeral shaft fracture in terms of fracture healing, complications, and functional outcome.

METHODS

Databases of Embase, Medline ALL, Web-of-Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were systematically searched for publications reporting clinical and functional outcomes of humeral shaft fractures after non-operative treatment with a functional brace or operative treatment by intramedullary nailing (IMN; antegrade or retrograde) or plate osteosynthesis (open plating or minimally invasive). A pooled analysis of the results was performed using MedCalc.

RESULTS

A total of 173 studies, describing 11,868 patients, were included. The fracture healing rate for the non-operative group was 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 84-92%), 94% (95% CI 92-95%) for the IMN group and 96% (95% CI 95-97%) for the plating group. The rate of secondary radial nerve palsies was 1% in patients treated non-operatively, 3% in the IMN, and 6% in the plating group. Intraoperative complications and implant failures occurred more frequently in the IMN group than in the plating group. The DASH score was the lowest (7/100; 95% CI 1-13) in the minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis group. The Constant-Murley and UCLA shoulder score were the highest [93/100 (95% CI 92-95) and 33/35 (95% CI 32-33), respectively] in the plating group.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that even though all treatment modalities result in satisfactory outcomes, operative treatment is associated with the most favorable results. Disregarding secondary radial nerve palsy, specifically plate osteosynthesis seems to result in the highest fracture healing rates, least complications, and best functional outcomes compared with the other treatment modalities.

Use of patient reported experience measure and patient reported outcome measures to evaluate differences in surgical or non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures

Background

The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of patient reported experience measures (PREMs) in humeral shaft fractures managed with or without surgery against patient reported outcome measures (PROMs).

Methods

Adult patients treated for a humeral shaft fracture between June 2015 and August 2017 were included in non-surgery and surgery (early and late surgery) groups. The PREM questionnaire was based on patient and clinician feedback obtained during focus groups and was posted to patients. PROMs included the short form-12 (SF-12) and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, stiffness, function and satisfaction.

Results

Eighty-one patients responded, 54 patients were treated in a brace and 27 with surgery (13 early, 14 late). There was moderate positive correlation between PREM and VAS satisfaction and function and moderate negative correlation with VAS pain and stiffness. There was also moderate positive correlation between PREM and SF-12 mental and weak positive correlation with SF-12 physical. The late surgery group had poorer PREMs (expectations, p = 0.002 and friends & family test, p = 0.0001) and PROMs (VAS satisfaction, p = 0.005) compared to the early surgery group.

Conclusions

PREMs can be used in conjunction with PROMs to improve the patient's quality of care and as a means of identifying, at an early stage, those patients not doing well and to offer surgery.

Complications Are Infrequent After Humeral Shaft Fractures Due to Low-Energy Gunshot Injuries

OBJECTIVE

To describe humerus shaft fractures after low-energy gunshot wound (GSW) and compare with blunt injuries. We hypothesized that nerve injury, infection, and fracture union would be similar.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTING

Urban Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

Four hundred three patients were treated for a humeral shaft fracture over 18 years. Sixty-two patients sustained injury due to GSW.

INTERVENTION

Primary open reduction and internal fixation was pursued in 59%, including 32% after GSW.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Rates of nerve injury, infection, and fracture union.

RESULTS

Patients with GSW were younger with a mean age of 30 years, more likely male (90%), with isolated injuries (84%), and less likely to have simple fractures (84%). Both groups experienced high rates of union (98% of GSW fractures vs. 99% of closed high-energy fractures). Deep infection occurred in 1 patient (1.6%) after GSW. Rates of deep infection in the closed and open blunt trauma fracture groups were similarly low at 1% and 4.5%, respectively. Nerve injury on presentation after GSW was more common than after low-energy and high-energy closed fractures (47% vs. 13% and 27%), but similar to blunt open fracture (52%). Despite higher rates of nerve injury, nerve recovery occurred at similarly high rates after both GSW and blunt injuries (78% vs. 86%).

CONCLUSIONS

Nerve injuries are more common after GSW, but most recover without intervention. Infection is uncommon after GSW, and secondary unplanned operations are rare. Initial nonoperative care of most GSW humerus fractures, even with radial nerve injury at the time of presentation, seems appropriate.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. 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

BACKGROUND

Operative 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

There 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.

CONCLUSION

The 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.

Surgical Versus Nonsurgical Management of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

INTRODUCTION

The aim was to compare surgical and nonsurgical management for adults with humeral shaft fractures in terms of patient-reported upper limb function, health-related quality of life, radiographic outcomes, and complications.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry, and OpenGrey (Repository for Grey Literature in Europe) were searched in September 2021. All published prospective randomized trials comparing surgical and nonsurgical management of humeral shaft fractures in adults were included. Of 715 studies identified, five were included in the systematic review and four in the meta-analysis. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. Methodological quality was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Pooled data were analyzed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis comprised 292 patients (mean age 41 [18 to 83] years, 67% male). Surgery was associated with superior Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and Constant-Murley scores at 6 months (mean DASH difference 7.6, P = 0.01; mean Constant-Murley difference 8.0, P = 0.003), but there was no difference at 1 year (DASH, P = 0.30; Constant-Murley, P = 0.33). No differences in health-related quality of life or pain scores were found. Surgery was associated with a lower risk of nonunion (0.7% versus 15.7%; odds ratio [OR] 0.13, P = 0.004). The number needed to treat with surgery to avoid one nonunion was 7. Surgery was associated with a higher risk of transient radial nerve palsy (17.4% versus 0.7%; OR 8.23, P = 0.01) but not infection (OR 3.57, P = 0.13). Surgery was also associated with a lower risk of reintervention (1.4% versus 19.3%; OR 0.14, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery may confer an early functional advantage to adults with humeral shaft fractures, but this is not sustained beyond 6 months. The lower risk of nonunion should be balanced against the higher risk of transient radial nerve palsy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Refractory humeral non-union: treatment with photodynamic intramedullary implant IlluminOss® and internal fixation

Surgically treated humeral shaft fractures can develop into pseudoarthrosis (PSA). Even if PSA is treated according to the proposed literature, refractory non-union of the humerus can be determined. Due to the rarity of this condition, we report our experience in the management of refractory pseudarthrosis of the humerus at the IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopedic Institute (Milan, Italy). We used internal fixation with plate and screws associated with the implant of the IlluminOss® Photodynamic Bone Stabilization System to increase bone stability and improve anchoring of the implant medium. This combined treatment allowed the consolidation of the complex fracture despite the bone loss, ensuring excellent stability of the fracture stumps and constituting a flexible and stable system with the most favourable biomechanical conditions. An increase in refractory PSA cases is likely in the future, due to a higher incidence of surgically treated humeral shaft fractures than in the past. Further studies on the effectiveness of the combined use of plate and screw and the IlluminOss® system will be indispensable.

Prevalence and risk factors for pseudarthrosis in humeral shaft fractures treated by minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis: A 10-year review

Introduction

Fractures of the humeral shaft account for about 3% to 5% of all fractures. Although conservative treatment remains the first choice, there are a number of surgical indications. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis shows good functional results. However, complications have been reported, such as non-union.

Objective

To assess the prevalence and risk factors for non-union after treatment of humeral shaft fractures using minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis.

Materials and methods

This retrospective study was carried out in patients treated by minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis between 2009 and 2019. Demographic data and variables related to the fracture that could influence bone healing were analysed. The unpaired t-test and Mann-Whitney test were used for the statistical analyses. Categorical variables were analysed using the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

Results

The study population showed a male predominance (53 of 75, 70.7%). The average time for fracture healing was 19.8 ± 15.3 weeks. Seven patients developed non-union. Only the presence of an open fracture increased the likelihood of non-union.

Conclusions

The prevalence of non-union in patients treated by minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis was 9.3%. Patients with open fractures were six times more likely to progress to non-union. Fracture characteristics (Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen classification, fracture location and plate working length) did not influence progression to non-union.

Antegrade vs retrograde intramedullary nailing in humerus shaft fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Plate osteosynthesis, external fixators and intramedullary nails are the commonly used devices for fixation of humerus shaft fractures. Humerus nails are gradually coming into popular use. Both antegrade and retrograde nails are used for this, however no evidence clearly states the benefits of one over the other. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the available evidence comparing the complications and outcomes of antegrade versus retrograde nails.

Patients and methods

We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Meta-analyses Statement (PRISMA) guidelines. All studies in any language comparing the use of antegrade and retrograde nailing for humerus fractures, with a minimum follow up of 12 months were included. The primary outcome measures were complications and time to union.

Results

Seven studies including 384 patients (200 antegrade, 184 retrograde) were analyzed. A significantly lower complication rate was observed with retrograde nails (OR 1.77, p = 0.04, 95% CI 1.02,3.06; p = 0.04). Antegrade nails were associated with shorter operative time (MD -13.69, p > 0.00001). There was no significant difference in time to union and intra-operative blood loss between the two techniques.

Conclusion

Retrograde nails have a significantly lower complication rate. However, the surgeon's experience with these devices and the location of the fracture are the primary considerations when choosing either implant.

Loe

Level IV.

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.

WHICH SURGICAL TREATMENT IS PREFERABLE IN HUMERAL DIAPHYSEAL FRACTURES? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

Humeral diaphyseal fractures are very common. Many treatments have been proposed but the choice of the best one is often complex.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the proposed study is to analyze the data in the literature in order to define the risks, advantages and disadvantages of the alternative surgical treatments (anterograde/retrograde intramedullary nailing, ORIF, MIPO).

METHODS

PubMed / Medline and Google Scholar were searched for prospective randomized or case-control retrospective studies about surgical treatment of humeral diaphyseal fractures with nailing, ORIF and MIPO, according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome considered was the fracture healing time by comparing nailing-ORIF, nailing-MIPO and ORIF-MIPO. Differences in the rate of post-operative complications, patient satisfaction, intra-operative blood loss and surgical time were considered secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

506 studies were identified, but only 10 studies were valid for the systematic review. No differences between nailing, ORIF and MIPO were recorded in terms of healing and surgical times. Intra-operative blood loss was significantly higher during ORIF (p 0.024). No differences were found in the restoration of function evaluated using clinical scales. The rate of complications was 27.4% for nailing, 21.2% for ORIF and 13.8% for MIPO. The difference was statistically significant only by comparing nailing with MIPO (p 0.012), probably because anterograde nailing is more often correlated to shoulder impairment. ORIF was at higher risk of infection compared to nailing (p 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Humeral diaphyseal fractures require careful pre-operative planning, ensuring reduced healing time, less soft tissue damage and low rate of complications. The lower exposure of the fracture allows for excellent results with reduced bleeding and lower risk of complications.

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

Objective

The surgical treatment scheme of humeral shaft fracture is still controversial with no consensus reached. This meta-analysis was aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of intramedullary nail (IMN) and locking compression plate (LCP) in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures.

Methods

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and Chinese databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure Project, Wanfang database, and China biomedical abstracts database, were used to search the literature. Review Manager software was employed for statistical analysis and establishing forest and funnel maps. Categorical variables were measured by relative risk (RR), and standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to measure continuous variables. 95% confidence intervals were used for each variable. The modified Jadad scale, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and Cochrane's bias risk tools were used to evaluate the bias and risk of eligible studies.

Results

A total of 14 studies were included in the analysis with a total of 903 patients with humeral shaft fracture. Significant differences with regard to operation time (Std = -1.18, 95% CI: -2.14, -0.22, Z = 2.41, P = 0.02), blood loss (Std = -2.97, 95% CI: -4.32, -1.63, Z = 4.34, P < 0.001), and postoperative infection rate (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: -0.15, 0.68, Z = 2.98, P = 0.003) were noted between the IMN group and LCP group. In addition, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score (Std = -0.22, 95% CI: -0.44, 0.01, Z = 2.08, P = 0.04) and the rate of shoulder and elbow function limitation (RR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.06, 3.33, Z = 2.17, P = 0.03) between the 2 groups were also statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the rate of radial nerve injury, nonunion, delayed healing, and secondary operation between the two groups.

Conclusion

IMN is superior than the LCP in terms of the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative infection, suggesting its superiority in the humeral shaft fracture fixation. However, IMN is inferior to LCP in ASES score and shoulder elbow function limitation rate, indicating poor early postoperative functional recovery. More studies are required to evaluate and analyze the clinical efficacy between IMN and LCP regarding long-term function after artificial graft removal.

The management of displaced humeral shaft fractures - A survey of UK shoulder and elbow surgeons

Introduction

Indications for surgical management of displaced humeral shaft fractures are not clearly established, leading to variations in practice. The aim of this study was to determine the scale of these variations in the UK practice to help design a future national trial.

Methods

An online survey was sent to all surgeon members of British Elbow and Shoulder Society to help define humeral shaft fractures, fracture displacement as well as indications for operative and non-operative management. Patient and injury related factors considered important when managing humeral shaft fractures were investigated.

Results

The survey achieved a response rate of 32% (104/327). There was a lack of consensus on definitions for humeral shaft fractures and fracture displacement. A functional brace was the most common form of non-operative treatment (63%). Majority immobilise humeral shaft fractures for 4-8 weeks or until callus are visible (62%) with a similar number considering operative treatment if adequate signs of healing are not present at around 12-16 weeks. Around half of our respondents exclusively use plates with variations in preference of approach and a minority (2%) exclusively use intra-medullary nails.

Conclusion

The significant variation in management of displaced humeral shaft fractures in the UK suggests a clear need to evaluate clinical and cost effectiveness through a multi-centre randomised trial.

Preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound combined with MIPPO for treatment of middle-inferior humerus fractures

Background and purpose

Open reduction and internal fixation through the posterior approach are standard methods for treating middle-inferior humerus fractures. Given the limited operative field and difficulty in locating the radial nerve, the minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) technique via the posterior approach to treat middle-inferior humerus fractures has rarely been reported. This study aims to evaluate the clinical effect of the preoperative study of the radial nerve position by B-ultrasound and its intraoperative protection combined with MIPPO in managing middle-inferior humerus fractures.

Methods

The data were studied retrospectively involving 64 participants who had surgery for middle-inferior humerus fractures from the start of 2017 to the end of 2020. Participants were divided into two groups, those treated with the MIPPO technique, including newly developed dual procedures and preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound (group A), and those treated with open reduction and internal plating fixation (group B).

Results

All the cases were followed up for 12–34 months (an average of 25.6 ± 8.76 months), and there was no significant difference in the mean operative duration, surgical incision infection, range of motion (ROM) and MEPS (Mayo elbow performance score) for groups A and B. However, the occurrence of complications (radial nerve palsy, bone nonunion and flexible internal fixation or ruptures) in group B was significantly higher than the group A. A statistically significant difference was observed in the intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay and fracture nonunion time between the two groups. All the cases gained bone union within the MIPPO group.

Conclusion

MIPPO via the posterior dual approach associated with preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound does not increase radial nerve injury, however, it exhibits obvious advantages in the bone union, which is worthy of clinical application.

Return to work and sport after a humeral shaft fracture

Aims

The primary aim of this study was to determine the rates of return to work (RTW) and sport (RTS) following a humeral shaft fracture. The secondary aim was to identify factors independently associated with failure to RTW or RTS.

Methods

From 2008 to 2017, all patients with a humeral diaphyseal fracture were retrospectively identified. Patient demographics and injury characteristics were recorded. Details of pre-injury employment, sporting participation, and levels of return post-injury were obtained via postal questionnaire. The University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Activity Scale was used to quantify physical activity among active patients. Regression was used to determine factors independently associated with failure to RTW or RTS.

Results

The Work Group comprised 177 patients in employment prior to injury (mean age 47 years (17 to 78); 51% female (n = 90)). Mean follow-up was 5.8 years (1.3 to 11). Overall, 85% (n = 151) returned to work at a mean of 14 weeks post-injury (0 to 104), but only 60% (n = 106) returned full-time to their previous employment. Proximal-third fractures (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.0 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2 to 14.2); p = 0.029) were independently associated with failure to RTW. The Sport Group comprised 182 patients involved in sport prior to injury (mean age 52 years (18 to 85); 57% female (n = 104)). Mean follow-up was 5.4 years (1.3 to 11). The mean UCLA score reduced from 6.9 (95% CI 6.6 to 7.2) before injury to 6.1 (95% CI 5.8 to 6.4) post-injury (p < 0.001). There were 89% (n = 162) who returned to sport: 8% (n = 14) within three months, 34% (n = 62) within six months, and 70% (n = 127) within one year. Age ≥ 60 years was independently associated with failure to RTS (aOR 3.0 (95% CI 1.1 to 8.2); p = 0.036). No other factors were independently associated with failure to RTW or RTS.

Conclusion

Most patients successfully return to work and sport following a humeral shaft fracture, albeit at a lower level of physical activity. Patients aged ≥ 60 yrs and those with proximal-third diaphyseal fractures are at increased risk of failing to return to activity.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):236–244.

Non operative management of fractures of the humerus Evaluation of a new extension casting method

Fractures of the humeral shaft represent 2-4% of all fractures and functional bracing is the gold standard in conservative management. Complications like restricted shoulder range of motion and malunion of the proximal shaft fractures have however been reported. We conducted a retrospective chart re- view of patients treated with the extension casting method over a period of 16 years. Topographically, Garnavos P, M, D, PM and MD fractures and morphologically Simple, Complex and Intermediate fractures were included. Between 2003 and 2019, 74 patients were treated with extension casting. The fractures united at a mean of 10 weeks and there was no case of non-union. Humerus is one of the bones where conservative methodology is still very pertinent. Extension casting gives reproducible and good results. It also addresses patient comfort issues to a considerable extent by allowing shoulder motion and easier maintenance of personal hygiene.

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

Background and/or Hypothesis

Prior literature has supported similar complication rates and outcomes for humeral shaft fractures treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with a plate/screw construct versus intramedullary nailing (IMN). The purpose of this study is to determine whether surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) differ between ORIF and IMN for these fractures.

Methods

Adult patients (≥ 18 years) treated for isolated humeral shaft fractures by ORIF or IMN between June 18, 2014 and June 17, 2019 at a single tertiary academic center were available for inclusion. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN groups, obtained through our institution's information technology value tool, were adjusted to 2019 US dollars and converted to relative costs per institutional policy. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

Results

Demographic factors did not differ between ORIF and IMN cohorts with the exception of age (mean of 18.6 years older for IMN; P < .001) and American Society of Anesthesiologist class (higher for IMN; P = .029). Substantial cost variation was observed among the 39 included ORIF and 21 IMN cases. Costs pertaining to operating room utilization (P = .77), implants (P = .64), and the recovery room (P = .27) were similar for ORIF and IMN, whereas supply costs were significantly greater for IMN with a median (interquartile range) of 0.21 (0.17 ∼ 0.28), more than twice the supply costs of ORIF (0.09 [0.05 ∼ 0.13], P < .001). The SETDC of IMN was significantly greater than that of ORIF (median [interquartile range]:1.00 [0.9 to 1.13] vs. 0.83 [0.71∼1.05], respectively; P = .047).

Discussion and/or Conclusion

Our study found that the SETDC for humeral shaft fracture fixation was greater for IMN than for ORIF, although patient cohorts differed significantly with respect to age and the American Society of Anesthesiologist class. Surgeons should take these findings into consideration when consenting patients with humeral shaft fractures for the appropriate fixation type.

ORIF versus MIPO for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized clinical trials and observational studies

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the optimal operative technique for humeral shaft fractures. This meta-analysis aims to compare minimal-invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for humeral shaft fractures regarding non-union, re-intervention, radial nerve palsy, time to union, operation duration and functional outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing MIPO with ORIF for humeral shaft fractures. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies).

RESULTS

A total of two RCT's (98 patients) and seven observational studies (263 patients) were included. The effect estimates obtained from observational studies and RCT's were similar in direction and magnitude. MIPO carries a lower risk for non-union (RD: 5%; OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.9) and secondary radial nerve palsy (RD 5%; OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1- 0.9). Nerve function eventually restored spontaneously in all patients in both groups. Results were inconclusive regarding re-intervention (RD 7%; OR: 0.7, 95%CI 0.2-1.9), infection (RD 4%; OR 0.4, 95%CI 0.1-1.5), time to union (MD -1 week, 95%CI -3 - 1) and operation duration (MD -13 minutes, 95%CI -38.9 - 11.9). Functional shoulder scores (SMD 0.01, 95%CI -0.3 - 0.3) and elbow scores (SMD 0.01, 95%CI -0.3 - 0.3) were similar for the different operative techniques.

CONCLUSION

MIPO has a lower risk for non-union than ORIF for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Radial nerve palsy secondary to operation is a temporary issue resolving in all patients in both treatment groups. Although both treatment options are viable, the general balance leans towards MIPO having more favorable outcomes.

[Compromising due to additive cerclages : Can surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures cause damage to the radial nerve?]

BACKGROUND

In many cases the treatment of humeral shaft fractures is challenging and despite the large diversity of available approaches, no standard treatment exists. In addition to conservative treatment, intramedullary nails and plate osteosynthesis are competing methods for healing humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, cerclage is considered to be an additive treatment for spiral fractures; however, this also increases the risk of radial nerve neuropathy and is said to compromise the perfusion of bone fragments. The goal of this study was to investigate secondary radial nerve neuropathy using additive and limited invasive cerclages for nail osteosynthesis of humeral shaft fractures.

METHODS

In the present study a total of 102 patients with humeral shaft fractures were clinically and neurologically re-examined after having been treated with nail osteosynthesis and additive cerclage via a limited invasive access over the past 5 years. In total 193 cerclages with limited invasive access were inserted during this time period.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Of the patients four (3.9%) showed a secondary radial neuropathy during operative stabilization. Neurophysiological and neurosonographic examinations revealed that this had not been caused by compromising, embedding or severance of the radial nerve due to the cerclage. Two out of these nerve lesions recovered spontaneously within 3 and 6 months, respectively. The other two cases could not be documented over a period of 12 months due to death of the patient. With 3.9% of iatrogenic radial nerve lesions the rate of nerve lesions falls into the lower range of that which has previously been described in the literature for nerve lesions due to operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures (3-12%). We thus conclude that there is no increased risk for iatrogenic injury of the radial nerve using additive and limited invasive cerclage.

Can We Stratify Quality and Cost for Older Patients With Proximal and Midshaft Humerus Fractures?

Introduction:

This study sought to investigate whether a validated trauma triage tool can stratify hospital quality measures and inpatient cost for middle-aged and geriatric trauma patients with isolated proximal and midshaft humerus fractures.

Materials and Methods:

Patients aged 55 and older who sustained a proximal or midshaft humerus fracture and required inpatient treatment were included. Patient demographic, comorbidity, and injury severity information was used to calculate each patient’s Score for Trauma Triage in the Geriatric and Middle-Aged (STTGMA). Based on scores, patients were stratified to create minimal, low, moderate, and high risk groups. Outcomes included length of stay, complications, operative management, ICU/SDU-level care, discharge disposition, unplanned readmission, and index admission costs.

Results:

Seventy-four patients with 74 humerus fractures met final inclusion criteria. Fifty-eight (78.4%) patients presented with proximal humerus and 16 (21.6%) with midshaft humerus fractures. Mean length of stay was 5.5 ± 3.4 days with a significant difference among risk groups (P = 0.029). Lower risk patients were more likely to undergo surgical management (P = 0.015) while higher risk patients required more ICU/SDU-level care (P < 0.001). Twenty-six (70.3%) minimal risk patients were discharged home compared to zero high risk patients (P = 0.001). Higher risk patients experienced higher total inpatient costs across operative and nonoperative treatment groups.

Conclusion:

The STTGMA tool is able to reliably predict hospital quality measures and cost outcomes that may allow hospitals and providers to improve value-based care and clinical decision-making for patients presenting with proximal and midshaft humerus fractures.

Level of Evidence:

Prognostic Level III.

MIPO versus nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on the optimal operative technique for humeral shaft fractures. This meta-analysis aims to compare minimal-invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with nail fixation for humeral shaft fractures regarding healing, complications and functional results.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing MIPO with nailing for humeral shaft fractures. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Analyses were repeated stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies).

RESULTS

A total of 2 RCTs (87 patients) and 5 observational studies (595 patients) were included. The effects estimated in observational studies and RCTs were similar in direction and magnitude for all outcomes except operation duration. MIPO has a lower risk for non-union (RD 7%; OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) and re-intervention (RD 13%; OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8). Functional shoulder (SMD 1.0, 95% CI 0.2-1.8) and elbow scores (SMD 0.4, 95% CI 0-0.8) were better among patients treated with MIPO. The risk for radial nerve palsy following surgery was equal (RD 2%; OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.2) and nerve function recovered spontaneously in all patients in both groups. No difference was detected with regard to infection, time to union and operation duration.

CONCLUSION

MIPO has a considerable lower risk for non-union and re-intervention, leads to better shoulder function and, to a lesser extent, better elbow function compared to nailing. Although nailing appears to be a viable option, the evidence suggests that MIPO should be the preferred treatment of choice. The learning curve of minimal-invasive plating should, however, be taken into account when interpreting these results.

Intramedullary Nail Fixation for the Treatment of Pathologic Humeral Shaft Fractures

The goal of this study was to report the clinical outcomes of pathologic humeral shaft fractures treated with reamed or unreamed intramedullary nail fixation in an era of longer patient survival. A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who underwent intramedullary nail fixation performed by a single surgeon for pathologic humeral shaft fractures at a Level I trauma center from 2009 to 2017. Of the 25 patients who were identified, 9 were excluded. Groups were categorized according to whether they underwent reamed or unreamed fixation, and they were evaluated for evidence of union, complications, and reoperation. Of the patients, 11 underwent an unreamed procedure and 5 underwent a reamed procedure. Mean length of follow-up was 51.5 weeks. Of the patients who participated, 12 (75%) showed evidence of union and 2 patients (12.5%) showed evidence of nonunion, with no statistical difference between the groups. Five patients (31.3%) had complications. One nonunion occurred in the reamed group and did not require reoperation. In the unreamed group, complications consisted of 1 delayed union, 1 nonunion treated with revision intramedullary nail fixation, and 2 cases of disease progression that required reoperation. Intramedullary nail fixation of pathologic humeral shaft fractures achieves rates of union parallel to those seen with fixation in a healthy population. The length of follow-up in the current study was longer than the life expectancy reported by previous authors, which can be attributed to improvements in the treatment of cancer. The current authors argue that unreamed fixation is the optimal technique because it yields similar outcomes to a reamed approach and is faster and potentially safer. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(5):e389-e398.].

Plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing of proximal humerus fractures: an ACS NSQIP-based comparative analysis over 8 years

PURPOSE

The primary goal of this study was to compare the utilization of plate versus intramedullary nail (IMN) in the treatment of humerus fractures. Secondarily, we sought to examine whether any differences in demographics and clinical course of patients who receive a nail versus plate affect the procedure selection process.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database was queried for patients surgically treated for a humeral shaft fracture from the years 2007-2015, using current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Patients with overlapping procedures, nonunion, polytrauma, and malignancy were excluded. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was calculated to compare preoperative comorbidities. A two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test was used to compare numerical values, whereas the Fisher exact and Chi-squared analyses were performed to compare categorical variables. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Preoperative variables with a p value < 0.05 and a clinical prevalence > 1%, indicating statistical and clinical significance, were included in a logistic regression for multivariate analysis to identify any independent predictors for procedure selection (IMN versus PF) based on preoperative patient characteristics.

RESULTS

During the study period plate fixation increased from 7 cases per year to 272 cases per year, while IMN increased from 8 cases per year to 80 cases per year. IMNs were mostly in older patients (63.85 vs 56.19 years, p < 0.001), and patients with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (4.64 vs 2.79, p < 0.001). IMN was associated with shorter operation times (104 min vs 128 min, p < 0.001) and longer lengths of hospital stay (3.43d vs 2.78d, p < 0.001). No significant differences in overall complication rates were seen between patients who received IMN versus PF. However, the postoperative mortality rate was higher in patients who received IMN compared to PF (2.19% vs 0.40%, p < 0.01). Based on the regression analysis, patient age was the only independent patient factor demonstrated to predict the utilization of IMN over PF in older patients with humeral shaft fractures p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

According to this NSQIP-based analysis, the rate of PF and IMN utilization increased in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures over a period of 8 years, but PF was performed at an overall a higher rate than IMN. Intramedullary nailing was preferred over PF in older patients with more comorbidities. The last possibly contributed to the higher 30-day mortality rate observed in patients who received IMN compared to PF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Retrospective comparative study.

Conservative vs. operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized clinical trials and observational studies

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare conservative vs. operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures in terms of the nonunion rate, reintervention rate, permanent radial nerve palsy rate, and functional outcomes. Secondarily, effect estimates from observational studies were compared with estimates of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The PubMed/Medline, Embase, CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) databases were searched for both RCTs and observational studies comparing conservative with operative treatment for humeral shaft fractures.

RESULTS

A total of 2 RCTs (150 patients) and 10 observational studies (1262 patients) were included. The pooled nonunion rate of all studies was higher in patients treated conservatively (15.3%) vs. operatively (6.4%) (risk difference, 8%; odds ratio [OR], 2.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-4.5; I² = 0%). The reintervention rate was also higher for conservative treatment (14.3%) than for operative treatment (8.9%) (risk difference, 6%; OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5; I² = 30%). The higher reintervention rate was predominantly attributable to the higher nonunion rate in patients treated conservatively. The permanent radial nerve palsy rate was equal in both groups (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.2-1.9; I² = 18%). There appeared to be no difference in mean time to union and mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores between the treatment groups. No difference was found between effect estimates form observational studies and RCTs.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review shows that satisfactory results can be achieved with both conservative and operative management; however, operative treatment reduces the risk of nonunion compared with conservative treatment, with comparable reintervention rates (for indications other than nonunion). Furthermore, operative treatment results in a similar permanent radial nerve palsy rate, despite its inherent additional surgery-related risks. No difference in mean time-to-union and short-term functional results was detected.

Effect of Surgery vs Functional Bracing on Functional Outcome Among Patients With Closed Displaced Humeral Shaft Fractures: The FISH Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Humeral shaft fractures traditionally have been treated nonsurgically, but there has been a steady increase in the rate of surgery over the past 2 decades without high-quality evidence to justify the trend.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of surgical treatment with open reduction and internal plate fixation to nonsurgical treatment with functional bracing in the treatment of closed humeral shaft fractures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized clinical trial conducted at 2 university hospital trauma centers in Finland, enrollment between November 2012 and January 2018 with a final follow-up of January 2019. A total of 82 adult patients with closed, unilateral, displaced humeral shaft fracture met criteria for inclusion. Patients were excluded if they had cognitive disabilities preventing them from following the protocol or had multimorbidity or multiple trauma.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned to surgical treatment with open reduction and internal plate fixation (n = 38) or to nonsurgical treatment with functional bracing (n = 44).

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE

The primary outcome was Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at 12 months (range, 0 to 100 points, 0 denotes no disability and 100 extreme disability; minimal clinically important difference, 10 points).

RESULTS

Among 82 patients who were randomized (mean age, 48.9 years; 38 women [46%]; 44 men [54%]), 78 (95%) completed the trial. Thirteen (30%) of the patients assigned to functional bracing underwent surgery during the 12-month follow-up period to promote healing of the fracture. At 12 months, the mean DASH score was 8.9 (95% CI, 4.2 to 13.6) in the surgery group and 12.0 (95% CI, 7.7 to 16.4) in the bracing group (between-group difference, -3.1 points; 95% CI, -9.6 to 3.3; P = .34). Eleven patients (25%) allocated to functional bracing developed fracture nonunion. Three patients (8%) allocated to surgery developed a temporary radial nerve palsy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among patients with closed humeral shaft fracture, internal fixation surgery, compared with nonoperative functional bracing, did not significantly improve functional outcomes at 12 months. However, the substantial amount of treatment crossover from nonoperative to surgical treatment should be considered when interpreting the trial results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01719887.

Length of stay and 30-day readmissions after isolated humeral shaft fracture open reduction and internal fixation compared to intramedullary nailing

INTRODUCTION

Open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) and intramedullary nailing (IMN) have similar union rates for treating humerus shaft fractures, but IMN leads to increased incidence of shoulder impingement and reoperation. The difference in 30-day readmission rate and length of stay (LOS) between these procedures is unknown. The objective of the study was to compare 30-day unplanned readmissions and length of stay between humeral shaft fractures fixed with either ORIF or IMN.

METHODS

The nationwide readmissions database (NRD) was queried for patients with humeral shaft fractures treated with ORIF or IMN between 2015-2016. IMN cases were propensity matched to ORIF cases based on demographic and co-morbid variables. Multivariable logistic regression determined if treatment modality was an independent risk factor for 30-day readmission or length of stay >3 days.

RESULTS

There were 406 patients treated with IMN matched to 406 patients treated with ORIF. The 30-day readmission rate was 6.4% for IMN and 4.9% for ORIF (p = 0.45), and the median LOS was 3 days for each group (p = 0.45). Congestive heart failure (CHF)(OR=2.7, p = 0.04), depression (OR=3.3, p = 0.0008), and electrolyte abnormality (OR=3.6, p = 0.0003) were independent risk factors for readmission. Older age (OR=1.02, p = 0.03), CHF (OR=2.4, p = 0.03), electrolyte abnormality (OR=2.6, p = 0.0001), obesity (OR=2.8, p<0.0001), Medicaid (OR=2.1, p = 0.04), discharge to a facility (OR = 5.2, p<0.0001), discharge with home health services (OR=2.4, p = 0.0003), and open fracture (OR=2.3, p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for LOS >3 days. Procedure (ORIF vs. IMN) was not a predictor of 30-day readmission or LOS >3 days.

CONCLUSION

Comorbid conditions are risk factors for 30-day readmission and increased LOS. Comorbidity, discharge disposition, and open fractures are risk factors for increased LOS. Treating humeral shaft fractures with either ORIF or IMN did not affect readmission or length of stay.

Radial Nerve Palsy Recovery With Fractures of the Humerus: An Updated Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Radial nerve palsies with humeral shaft fractures have historically been treated with expectant management. A previous systematic review by Shao et al, based on studies published from 1964 to 2004, purported no difference in the rate of recovery between patients treated with early surgical intervention versus expectant treatment. However, the authors combined expectant treatment to include patients treated nonsurgically and those with delayed surgery. To better understand the effect of surgery and its timing on radial nerve recovery, an updated analysis was performed with stricter treatment definitions.

METHODS

An updated systematic review of the published literature was undertaken. An electronic database search was performed to identify publications that met specific inclusion criteria. A total of 23 articles published since 2000 met our eligibility requirements. Data were abstracted from these articles and analyzed in conjunction with the results of the systematic review by Shao et al. RESULTS:: The overall prevalence of radial nerve palsy was 12.3% (890/7,262). Patients with radial nerve palsy treated nonsurgically had a rate of spontaneous radial nerve recovery of 77.2%. Patients who failed nonsurgical management and underwent nerve exploration more than 8 weeks after their injury had a rate of recovery of 68.1%. Patients treated with early (within 3 weeks of the injury) surgical exploration and fracture repair had a rate of recovery of 89.8%.

DISCUSSION

From the published data from 1964 to 2017, patients who underwent surgical exploration within 3 weeks of injury had a significantly higher likelihood of regaining radial nerve function than patients who underwent nonsurgical management with or without late surgical exploration.

Geometrical analysis for assessing torsional alignment of humerus

BACKGROUND

Compared to other types of surgeries, minimally invasive surgeries (MISs) of humeral shaft fractures are associated with less radial nerve injury, less soft tissue injury and higher union rate. However, malrotation often occurs in MISs when closed reduction methods are used. This study aims to define specific palpable landmarks to help surgeons determine the correct torsional angle and reduce the incidence of malrotation.

METHODS

Twenty-eight normal humeral computed tomography scans were retrieved from our image database. One line was drawn through the vertices of the intertubercular sulcus of the humeral head in the coronal view, and another line was drawn through the longest axis between the medial and lateral condyles in the coronal view. The angle between these two lines was measured at least 3 times for each scan.

RESULTS

The profile of the intertubercular sulcus tangent line of the humeral head and the axis of the distal humerus was identified as the most accurate method for assessing the precision of torsion during MIS for humeral shaft fractures. The transepicondylar axis line is more internally rotated than the intertubercular sulcus tangent line. The mean angle was measured to be 41.1 degrees.

CONCLUSIONS

The axis of the distal humeral condyles is internally rotated by approximately 41.1 degrees compared with the intertubercular sulcus tangent line of the humeral head. Minimally invasive surgeries can be performed by using these palpable landmarks. The torsional deformities can be reduced with the proper angle adjustment without the need for fluoroscopy. It can also be used to treat unstable comminuted humeral fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective Study, Diagnostic study, Level III.