Good functional outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation for AO/OTA type 13-C2 and -C3 acute distal humeral fractures in patients aged over 45 years

The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures is useful to identify patients who may require treatment with hemi- or total elbow arthroplasty

Background

Classification systems are only useful if there is agreement among observers. The purpose of this study is to introduce a simple and clinically applicable classification system - The Copenhagen Classification System for Distal Humeral Fractures (CCDHF) and to compare the interobserver and intraobserver agreement for this classification with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA), and the Sheffield classification systems. The primary objective of the new classification system is to distinguish fractures that may not be suitable for open reduction and internal fixation, necessitating treatment options such as elbow hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

Methods

Five consultant elbow surgeons assessed a consecutive series of 105 sets X-rays of distal humeral fractures on 2 occasions with at least 10 weeks interval. All X-rays were classified according to AO/OTA, Sheffield, and the CCDHF systems. The CCDHF system has been developed collaboratively by a panel of five experienced elbow surgeons. Based on consensus, the surgeons identified specific fracture characteristics where elbow hemiarthroplasty or TEA might be needed.

Results

The mean interobserver agreement was fair for AO/OTA and moderate for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The mean intraobserver agreement was moderate for AO/OTA and substantial for Sheffield and the CCDHF. The observers were uncertain about the classification in 29% of the cases with the AO/OTA classification, 15% with the Sheffield classification, and 12% with CCDHF.

Conclusion

The CCDHF demonstrated validity and clinical applicability and can assist surgeons in identifying fractures that may require hemiarthroplasty or TEA treatment.

Adjunctive intraosseous wiring fixation technique for the comminuted distal humeral fractures

Distal humeral fractures are among the most challenging injuries to treat. Although precise repair of the articular surface is essential during surgery, accurate reconstruction of the metaphysis contributes to the overall stability of the fracture construct. The intraosseous wiring technique has been used for small-fragment fractures. However, its efficacy as an adjunct for distal humerus fixation has yet to be thoroughly investigated. This study aimed to demonstrate the applicability of this technique to comminuted, distal humeral fractures. In this retrospective case series, we describe 6 cases of intra-articular distal humerus fractures treated with this technique, followed by dual plating. We observed successful bone union in all patients, with the Mayo Elbow Performance Scores indicating "good" to "excellent" clinical outcomes for this procedure at the final follow-up. We believe that this intraosseous wiring technique should be an integral part of the toolbox of every surgeon because it is a relatively simple and highly effective procedure that requires no special instrument and can be used on various types of fractures.

Elbow hemiarthroplasty vs. open reduction internal fixation for acute Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type 13C fractures—A systematic review

Background

Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is the standard treatment for multifragmentary intra-articular distal humeral fractures. Fractures not amenable by ORIF are treated with total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). In recent years, elbow hemiarthroplasty (EHA) has been used as an alternative to TEA, as weight bearing restrictions and risk of component loosening are lower. We systematically reviewed the literature reporting functional outcomes and complication rates after either EHA or ORIF for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type 13C fractures.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and Scopus. The inclusion criteria were at least 5 patients, aged ≥50 years, AO/OTA type 13C fracture treated with ORIF or EHA, and evaluation with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Literature screening and data extraction were conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. The results were synthesized qualitatively using weighted means. No comparative statistical analyses were done.

Results

We included 27 articles, which included 96 patients treated with EHA and 535 patients treated with ORIF. We identified 1 randomized controlled trial and 26 case series. The weighted mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 86.9 (n = 89) in the EHA group and 84.7 (n = 535) in the ORIF group. There were 26 (33%) complications (n = 78) in the EHA group and 103 (38%) complications (n = 270) in the ORIF group. Complication rates were generally high in both groups.

Conclusion

We found comparable results of EHA and ORIF, which indicate that EHA is a viable treatment option for AO/OTA type 13C fractures not amenable by ORIF. Because of high risk of bias, interpretation of the results should be done with caution.