Is minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis superior to open plating for fixation of two-part fracture of the proximal humerus?

Treatment of proximal humeral fractures accompanied by medial calcar fractures using fibular autografts: A retrospective, comparative cohort study

BACKGROUND

Severe proximal humerus comminuted fractures are often accompanied by medial calcar comminuted fractures and loss of medial support, which are important factors that lead to internal fixation failure. The appropriate treatment for proximal humerus comminuted fractures has not been established. Therefore, this study assessed the outcomes of using a fibular autograft with locking plates to treat severe proximal humerus comminuted fractures.

AIM

To investigate the outcomes of using a fibular autograft with locking plates to treat severe proximal humerus comminuted fractures.

METHODS

This retrospective, comparative cohort study included two groups of patients. Group 1 comprised 22 patients and group 2 comprised 25 patients with complete follow-up data. Group 1 was treated with a fibular autograft with open reduction and locking plates to enable internal fixation. Group 2 was treated with open reduction and locking plates to enable internal fixation. The intraoperative blood loss volume from the shoulder wound, operative time, shoulder wound pain, bone fracture healing time, Constant-Murley score of the shoulder joint, preoperative Holden walking function score, Mallet score of the shoulder joint, and humeral neck-shaft angle during surgery of the two groups were compared, and the differences were analysed using an independent sample t-test.

RESULTS

Group 1 had a shorter mean operative time than group 2 (2.25 ± 0.30 h vs 2.76 ± 0.44 h; P = 0.000). Group 1 had a lower shoulder wound pain score on the first day after surgery than group 2 (7.91 ± 1.15 points vs 8.56 ± 1.00 points; P = 0.044). Group 1 had a shorter fracture healing time than group 2 (2.68 ± 0.48 mo vs 3.64 ± 0.64 mo; P = 0.000). Group 1 had higher Constant-Murley scores of the shoulder joint at 3, 6, and 12 mo after surgery than group 2 (76.64 ± 4.02 points vs 72.72 ± 3.02 points, 86.36 ± 3.53 points vs 82.96 ± 3.40 points, and 87.95 ± 2.77 points vs 84.68 ± 2.63 points, respectively; P = 0.000, 0.002, and 0.000, respectively). Group 1 had higher Mallet scores of the shoulder joint at 3, 6, and 12 mo after surgery than group 2 (10.32 ± 0.57 points vs 9.96 ± 0.54 points, 13.36 ± 1.00 points vs 12.60 ± 0.87 points, and 13.91 ± 0.75 points vs 13.36 ± 0.70 points, respectively; P = 0.032, 0.007, and 0.013, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Using locking plates with a fibular autograft can recreate medial support, facilitate fracture healing, and improve shoulder function; therefore, this may be an effective treatment option for severe proximal humerus comminuted fractures.

Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs): comparison of functional outcome 1 year after minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) versus open reduction internal fixation (ORIF)

PURPOSE

Osteosynthetic treatment strategies of PHFs include MIPO or ORIF techniques. The aim of this study was to compare the 1 year outcome following either technique in type B PHFs.

METHODS

This study was designed as a retrospective cohort study of patients treated at one academic Level 1 trauma center. Patients from 2009 to 2019 who required surgical treatment of a type B PHF were eligible to be included in this study. Patients with A- or C-type fractures or patients requiring arthroplasty were excluded. All patients were treated with Proximal Humerus Interlocking System (PHILOS) and stratified according the approach into Group MIPO or Group ORIF. Outcome measures include local complications that occurred during hospitalization, nonunion after 12 months, and range of motion after 1 year follow-up.

RESULTS

This study included 149 (75.3%) patients in Group ORIF, and 49 (24.7%) in Group MIPO. The fracture morphology and concomitant injuries were comparable amongst these groups. When compared with Group MIPO, Group ORIF had a 2.6 (95% CI 0.6-11.7) higher risk of suffering from local complications. The rate of postoperative nerve lesions was comparable (OR 0.9, 95% CI 0.1-9.7) as was the rate of soft tissue complications (OR 2.0, 95% CI 0.2-17.2). The risk for nonunion was 4.5 times higher (95% 1.1-19.5) in Group ORIF when compared with Group MIPO. Group MIPO had a higher chance of flexion above 90° (OR 8.2, 95% CI 2.5-27.7).

CONCLUSION

This study provides indications that patients following surgical treatment of PHFs in MIPO technique might have favourable outcome. Large-scale and high-quality studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Plate osteosynthesis for proximal humerus fractures through a deltoid-split approach under traction in lateral decubitus position: preliminary results

Aim: We aimed to present deltoid split approach under traction in lateral decubitus position that we perform for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) and to present the preliminary surgical and clinical outcomes of our patients. Material and Method: Twelve patients who underwent plate osteosynthesis through a deltoid split approach under traction in lateral decubitus position between May 2019 and January 2021 were evaluated. Patient demographics, Neer classification, and time from injury to surgery were collected in all patients preoperatively. Radiation exposure time and operating time was recorded intraoperatively. Radiological outcomes were assessed, including time to union, and neck-shaft angle. Functional outcomes were evaluated using the Constant score at the minimum 12-month follow-up. Results: Twelve patients (5 male, 7 female) were evaluated with a mean age 58.6±10.7 years (range, 32 to 72 years) at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up period was 117.4±3.8 months). The mean operation time was 60.7±15.2 min (range, 44 to 92 min). The mean radiation exposure time was 6.1±3.0 s (range, 3.3 to 14.2 s). Fracture union was observed in all patients at mean 14.6±2.5 weeks (range, 8 to 20 weeks). The mean neck-shaft angle after the union was 134.5±3.4 degrees (range, 124 to 143 degrees). The mean Constant score was at the final follow-up was 76.4±8.7 (range, 63 to 90). Conclusion: Patient positioning in the lateral decubitus position under traction can be considered as a safe, reliable, and reproducible method in selected patients with PHFs.

Comparison between MIPO and the deltopectoral approach with allogenous fibular bone graft in proximal humeral fractures

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to investigate the clinical differences between open reduction and plate fixation via a deltopectoral approach with allogenous fibular bone graft and a minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), in Neer's classification two-, three- part proximal humeral fractures.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 77 patients with two-, three-part proximal humeral fractures were treated at two different institutions. Clinical and radiological evaluations were performed in 39 patients, who underwent MIPO at one institution (group A), and 38 patients, who underwent a deltopectoral approach with allo-fibular bone graft (group B) at another institution. The results between the groups were compared.

RESULTS

The MIPO technique was significantly less time consuming and caused less bleeding than the deltopectoral approach with allo-fibular bone graft (P<0.05). The duration of the fracture union was significantly reduced in group A (14.5±3.4; range, 10-22 weeks) compared to group B (16.4±4.3; range, 12-28) weeks (P<0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups when evaluating the visual analog scale and Constant scores between the two groups, 1 year postoperatively. In radiological evaluation, there was no difference in radiological outcomes between the two groups. There were no statistically significant differences in malunion between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The MIPO technique and deltopectoral approach with allo-fibular bone graft for two-, three-part proximal humeral fractures, show similar clinical and radiological results. However, allogenous fibular grafts require longer surgery, cause more bleeding, and result in longer fracture healing time than MIPO technique.

PHILOS plate versus nonoperative treatment in 2-, 3-, and 4-part proximal humeral fractures: Comparison with healthy control subjects

PURPOSE

There is no consensus in the literature on nonoperative treatment of displaced and multipart fractures of proximal humerus as those are normally treated operatively. Our aim was to compare the functional results of nonoperative management and open reduction internal fixation with the proximal humerus internal locking system of 2-, 3-, and 4-part proximal humerus fractures, among themselves and with a healthy control group.

METHODS

Between 2014 and 2018, 92 proximal humerus fractures constituting a nonoperative group (n = 47) and an operative group (n = 45) together with healthy control subjects (n = 45) were analyzed in a tertiary care referral center. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were used for subjective functional analysis. Range of motion and muscle strength were analyzed objectively for all patients and healthy control subjects.

RESULTS

In 2-part fractures, VAS scores and hand grip strength were determined as lower in the nonoperative group (p = 0.033 and p = 0.034, respectively). In 3- and 4-part fractures, there was no difference between the two groups in terms of ASES and VAS scores. Patients who underwent surgery had more muscle strength than those in the nonoperative group, but only arm extensor and forearm flexor muscle strengths were statistically significant for 3-part fractures. In cases of 4-part fractures, objective functional results were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

With insufficient functional results and high complication rates in surgery, nonoperative management is still the preferred choice for proximal humerus fractures, especially in case of multipart fractures.

Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

With the rapid aging of the population, the incidence of proximal humeral fracture (PHF) has increased. However, the optimal method for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) remains controversial.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with PHF who underwent locking plate internal fixation at our institution from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach used: an expanded deltoid-split approach group (ORIF group) and minimally invasive deltoid-split approach group (minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis, [MIPPO] group). The groups were compared in terms of demographic and perioperative characteristics, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 115 cases of PHF were included in our study, of which 64 cases were treated using the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach and 51 using the extended deltoid-split approach. Fluoroscopy was performed significantly less frequently in the ORIF group and the surgical duration was shorter. However, the postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and duration of postoperative hospital stay were significantly higher compared to the MIPPO group. Moreover, secondary loss was significantly less extensive in the ORIF group compared to the MIPPO group, while there was no significant group difference in fracture healing time, Constant shoulder score, or complications at the last follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical outcomes associated with both the minimally invasive and extended deltoid-split approaches were satisfactory. The data presented here suggest that the extended deltoid-split approach was superior to the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach in terms of operational time, fluoroscopy, and secondary loss of reduction, while the minimally invasive approach was superior in terms of postoperative pain and hospital stay. Accordingly, neither procedure can be considered definitively superior; the optimal surgical procedure for PHF can only be determined after full consideration of the situation and requirements of the individual patient.

Comparison between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and open reduction-internal fixation for proximal humeral fractures: a meta-analysis based on 1050 individuals

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and complications of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) in patients with proximal humeral fractures.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, and the Cochrane Library to identify all relevant studies from inception to April 2019. Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manage 5.3 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies involving 1050 patients (464 patients in the MIPO group and 586 patients in the ORIF group) were finally included. According to the meta-analysis, MIPO was superior to ORIF in operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, fracture union time, and constant score. However, MIPO was associated with more exposure to radiation and axillary nerve injury. No significant differences were found in length of hospital stays and complication except for axillary nerve injury.

CONCLUSION

The present evidence indicates that compared to ORIF, MIPO had advantages in functional outcomes, operation time, blood loss, postoperative pain, and fracture union time for the treatment of PHFs. However, the MIPO technique had a higher rate of axillary nerve injury and longer radiation time compared to ORIF.