Subbrachial approach to humeral shaft fractures: new surgical technique and retrospective case series study

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.

Iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in the surgical treatment of humerus shaft fracture -anterolateral versus posterior approach: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although many studies have investigated iatrogenic radial nerve palsy (RNP) in humerus shaft fracture, there is inconsistent evidence on which approach leads to iatrogenic RNP. Moreover, no meta-analysis has directly compared the anterolateral and posterior approaches regarding iatrogenic RNP.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched systematically for studies published before March 30, 2021. We included studies that (1) assessed the RNP in the surgical treatment of humerus shaft fracture and (2) directly compared the anterolateral and posterior approaches regarding the RNP. We performed synthetic analyses of the incidence of iatrogenic RNP and the recovery rate of iatrogenic RNP in humerus shaft fracture between the anterolateral and posterior approaches.

RESULTS

Our study enrolled nine studies, representing 1303 patients who underwent surgery for humerus shaft fracture. After exclusion of traumatic RNP, iatrogenic RNP was reported in 35 out of 678 patients in the anterolateral approach and in 69 out of 497 patients in the posterior approach. Pooled analysis revealed that the incidence of iatrogenic RNP was significantly higher in the posterior approach than in the anterolateral approach (OR = 2.72; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.70-4.35; P < 0.0001, I² = 0%), but there was no significant difference in the recovery rates of iatrogenic RNP between the two approaches (OR = 1.55; 95% CI, 0.26-9.18; P = 0.63, I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis, the posterior approach showed a higher incidence of iatrogenic RNP than the anterolateral approach in the surgical treatment of humerus shaft fracture. With limited studies, it is difficult to anticipate if any particular approach favors the recovery of iatrogenic RNP.

Anteromedial Surface Plating for Midshaft Fracture Humerus Through an Anterolateral Approach - A Better Option than Anterolateral Plating

Introduction

Osteosynthesis by plate fixation of humeral shaft fractures as a gold standard for fracture fixation has been proven beyond doubt. However, during conventional anterolateral plating Radial nerve injury may occur which can be avoided by applying plate on the medial flat surface. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of application of plate on the flat medial surface of humerus rather than the conventional anterolateral surface.

Materials and Methods

This study was conducted between Oct 2010 to Dec 2015. One-hundred-fifty fracture shafts of the humerus were treated with the anteromedial plating through the anterolateral approach.

Results

One-hundred-fifty patients with a fracture shaft of the humerus were treated with anteromedial plating. Twenty were female (mean ±SD,28 years±4.5) and 130 were male (mean ± SD, 38 years±5.6). One hundred and forty-eight out of 150 (98.6%) patients achieved union at 12 months. Two of three patients developed a superficial infection, both of which were treated successfully by antibiotics and one developed a deep infection, which was treated by wound debridement, prolonged antibiotics with the removal of the plate and subsequently by delayed plating and bone grafting.

Conclusion

In the present study, we applied plate on the anteromedial flat surface of humerus using the anterolateral approach. It is an easier and quicker fixation as compared to anterolateral plating because later involved much more dissection than a medial application of the plate and this application of plate on a medial flat surface, does not required Radial nerve exposure and palsy post-operatively. The significant improvement in elbow flexion without brachialis dissection is also a potential benefit of this approach. Based on our results, we recommend the application of an anteromedial plate for treatment of midshaft fractures humerus.

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

Background

The aim of this study was to retrospectively assess and compare the functional outcomes and complications following anterolateral versus posterior surgical approaches for the treatment of mid-shaft fractures of the humerus.

Material/Methods

This study included 107 patients treated for mid-shaft fractures between May 2015 and July 2018. Demographic and surgical data were collected for each patient. During follow-up visits, radiographs were acquired and evaluated. The clinical outcomes of the involved joints were assessed by the Constant scoring system, range of motion (ROM), and the Mayo Elbow Performance Scoring system at the 12-month follow-up.

Results

The posterior approach was performed in 57 patients with type A fractures (group I, n=28) and type B or C fractures (group III, n=29). The anterolateral approach was performed in 50 patients with type A fractures (group II, n=32) and type B or C fractures (group IV, n=18). There were no significant differences between group I and group II nor between group III and group IV with respect to patient demographic data, surgical data, Constant score, ROM, or Mayo Elbow Performance score. A significant difference in the total complication rate was observed between group I and II.

Conclusions

The anterolateral approach showed an advantage over the posterior approach for treating simple humeral mid-shaft fractures. However, this advantage was not observed in treating comminuted fractures.

Open reduction and internal fixation of humeral midshaft fractures: anterior versus posterior plate fixation

Background

Fractures of the humeral shaft represent 2–4% of all fractures. Fractures of the humerus have traditionally been approached posteriorly for open reduction and internal fixation. Reports of treating midshaft fractures with an open anterolateral approach and anterior plating are limited. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a series of humeral shaft fractures treated with plate osteosynthesis regarding the effect of the approach and plate location on the healing rate and occurrence of complications.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective chart review of patients aged over 18 years with humeral midshaft fractures treated with anterior or posterior plate fixation. Selection of the approach to the humerus was based on the particular pattern of injury and soft tissue involvement. The minimum follow-up duration was set at six months. The outcomes included the rate of union, primary nerve palsy recovery, secondary nerve damage, infection and revision surgery.

Results

Between 2006 and 2014, 58 patients (mean age, 59.9; range, 19–97 years) with humeral midshaft fractures were treated with anterior (n = 33) or posterior (n = 25) plate fixation. After a mean follow-up duration of 34 months, 57 of 58 fractures achieved union after index procedure. Twelve fractures were associated with primary radial nerve palsy. Ten of the twelve patients with primary radial palsy recovered completely within six months after the index surgery. In total, one patient developed secondary palsy after anterior plating, and three patients developed secondary palsy after posterior plating. No significant difference in the healing rate (p = 0.4), primary nerve palsy recovery rate (p = 0.6) or prevalence of secondary nerve palsy (p = 0.4) was found between the two clinical groups. No cases of infection after plate fixation were documented.

Conclusions

Open reduction and internal fixation using an anterior approach with plate fixation provides a safe alternative to posterior plating in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures. An anterior approach allows supine positioning of the patient and yields union and complication rates comparable to those of a posterior approach with plate fixation for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures.

Anterior humeral approach with nerve stimulator

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of radial nerve injury during surgery is as high as the prevalence of radial nerve injury due to trauma. The aim of this study is to minimize the risk of iatrogenic injury of radial nerve.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty patients with middle or distal diaphysis fractures of humerus and 18 patients with pseudoarthrosis at the same localizations were treated with surgery. Plate-screw fixation was performed with anterior approach in 43 patients. Eleven patients had minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis, and 14 patients had intramedullary nailing. The localization of the radial nerve was determined with nerve stimulator at the area of dissection.

RESULTS

Iatrogenic radial nerve injury did not occur in patients treated with open reduction or minimally invasive approach.

DISCUSSION

Nerve stimulator may be a method that decreases radial nerve injury, an iatrogenic complication. This method may be used in anterior approach and minimally invasive procedures.

Anterior approach in humeral plating osteosynthesis

CONTEXT

Humeral plating osteosynthesis is controversial, particularly regarding the choice between anterior and lateral approach, data for which in the context of a low-income country are lacking.

HYPOTHESIS

The anterior approach is an easy surgical technique, allowing good anatomic reconstruction. We hypothesize that the anterior approach is associated with fewer neurovascular lesions and functional sequelae than the lateral approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study with assessment update was carried out over a period of 6years 4months from January 2010 to June 2016, with consecutive recruitment in the city of Yaoundé, Cameroon. It consisted in a review of medical records, with physical reassessment on pre-designed and tested data-sheet. Sixty-two osteosyntheses were documented in 60 subjects operated on for humeral fracture or non-union. The following variables were studied: sociodemographic data, fracture profile, clinical profile, and functional shoulder and elbow results. Data analysis used the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS), version 23.0. Associations between qualitative variables were assessed on Chi square test, or Fisher test when the expected sample size was less than 5, and between quantitative and qualitative variables on Student t-test for comparison of means; p values≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The anterior approach showed better results. Operative time was shorter, at 102.5min on average, for 262cm³ blood loss, versus 141.6min and 330cm³ on the lateral approach, with a significant correlation between the two variables. The incidence of postoperative radial paralysis was significantly higher with the lateral approach (22.6% versus 3.2%; p=0.02), and there were likewise higher rates of postoperative infection (9.7% versus 6.5%), secondary displacement, implant damage, and malunion. Reduction was more often anatomical with the anterior approach (28.1% versus 11%) and cortical fixation was better (83.9% versus 61.3%). Functional shoulder and elbow recovery was nearly normal with both approaches, with superimposable values and no statistically significant difference in (p=0.4).

CONCLUSION

Cameroon being a low-income country, the anterior approach is of therapeutic and prognostic interest, being easy to perform, with a low rate of postoperative complications and good functional outcome.