Comparison of the Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in the Treatment of Humeral Mid-Shaft Fractures: A Retrospective Study

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

AIM

The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of two different surgical approaches, the anterolateral and posterior approaches, for treating humeral shaft fractures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 Between January 2015 and May 2021, 51 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with anterolateral and posterior approaches. Twenty-nine patients were operated with the posterior approach (group 1) and 22 with the anterolateral approach (group 2). Statistical analyses were performed between the two groups regarding age, gender distribution, fractured side, body mass index (BMI), type of trauma, Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification, and follow-up time. Complications such as operative time, amount of bleeding, incision length and implant fracture, radial nerve palsy, wound infection, and nonunion were compared between the two groups. Functional results of the elbow joint were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score.

RESULTS

 The mean follow-up period was 49.10±21.15 months (12-75 months) in group 1 and 50.00±23.71 months (range: 15-70 months) in group 2. There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of age, gender distribution, fractured side, BMI, trauma type, AO/OTA classification, and follow-up time (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and incision length (p>0.05). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.24±20.03 (range: 70-100 points) in group 1 and 81.36±8.34 (range: 70-100 points) in group 2, and no significant difference was found (p>0.05). When evaluated in terms of complications, there was no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). While there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding elbow joint range of motion, the limitation was observed in more patients in group 1.

CONCLUSION

 Similar satisfactory treatment results were obtained in patients who underwent anterolateral and posterior approaches in treating humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, no difference was found between the two approaches regarding complication rates.

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.

The risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery injury in anterolateral humeral plating using a 4.5 mm narrow DCP: A cadaveric study

INTRODUCTION

Fixation of humeral shaft fractures with a plate and screws can endanger the neurovascular structure if proper care is not taken. No studies to our knowledge have studied the risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery (RNPBA) injury from each screw hole of a 4.5 mm narrow dynamic compression plate (narrow DCP). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the risk of RNPBA injury in anterolateral humeral plating with a 4.5 mm narrow DCP.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

18 humeri of 9 fresh-frozen cadavers in the supine position were exposed via the anterolateral approach with 45 degrees of arm abduction. A hypothetical fracture line was marked at the midpoint of each humerus. A precontoured ten-hole 4.5mm narrow DCP was applied to the anterolateral surface of the humerus using the fracture line to position the center of the plate. All screw holes were drilled and screws inserted. The cadaver was then turned over to the prone position with 45 degrees of arm abduction, and the RNPBA exposed. The holes through in which 100% of the screw had contact with or penetrated the RNPBA were identified as dangerous screw holes, while lesser percentages of contact were defined as risky.

RESULTS

The relative distance ratios of the entire humeral length from the lateral epicondyle of the humerus to the 4th, 3rd, 2nd and 1st proximal holes were 0.64, 0.60, 0.56 and 0.52, respectively. The most dangerous screw hole was the 2nd proximal, in which all 18 screws had contacted or penetrated the nerve, followed by the risky 1st (12/18), 3rd (8/18) and 4th (2/18) holes.

CONCLUSION

In humeral shaft plating with the 4.5mm narrow DCP using the anterolateral approach, the 2nd proximal screw hole carries the highest risk of iatrogenic radial nerve and/or profunda brachii artery injury.