Distal-third diaphyseal fractures of the humerus: choice of approach and surgical treatment

Comparative Analysis of Anterolateral and Posterior Approaches for Distal Humerus Shaft Fractures: A Multicenter Retrospective Study

Background: Distal humeral shaft fractures (DHSFs) pose surgical challenges due to the proximity to the elbow joint, limited bone stock, and the risk of radial nerve injury. This study compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterolateral and posterior triceps-sparing approaches to determine the most effective surgical strategy. Methods: This multicenter retrospective study included 75 patients who underwent surgery for a DHSF between 2015 and 2021, with a minimum one-year follow-up, a distal fragment ≥3 cm, and no preoperative radial nerve injury. Fifty patients underwent anterior plating via anterolateral approach, and twenty-five underwent posterior plating. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were evaluated. Results: Bone union was achieved in 74 patients (98.7%), with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.21). The anterolateral approach resulted in a shorter operative time (116 ± 29.4 vs. 143 ± 31.4 min, p = 0.03). However, intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.36), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (p = 0.71), range of motion (p = 0.36), and complication rates (p = 0.21) were not significantly different. Two cases of transient radial nerve palsy occurred in the posterior group (p = 0.17), and four cases required implant removal due to discomfort (p = 0.18) in the anterolateral group. Conclusions: Both approaches effectively treat DHSFs with high union rates and comparable functional outcomes. However, the anterolateral approach significantly reduces operative time due to supine positioning, direct access, and avoiding radial nerve dissection. Posterior plating remains viable when stable anterior fixation is unachievable. Further studies should assess the long-term outcomes and factors influencing approach selection.

Treatment of Extra-Articular Distal Humerus Fractures: Current Concepts and Systematic Review

Background

Acute extra-articular distal humerus fractures (DHFs) continue to pose a treatment challenge for many orthopedic surgeons. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of treatment principles, while reporting union rates, time to union, complication rates, and outcome measures following operative and non-operative management.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies reporting clinical or functional outcomes following treatment for acute DHFs in patients > 17 years of age with a mean follow-up of 6 months or greater were included. Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria was used to assess risk of bias.

Results

A total of twenty articles were included with 754 fractures. The union rates after operative management were 97% (95% CI: 93-99%) compared to 99% (95% CI: 85-100%) after non-operative management. The most common patient reported outcome for operative studies was Mayo Elbow Performance Score (range 65-100). Range-of-motion (ROM) was the most common reported outcome in the non-operative studies. Complications rates after operative management were 13% (95% CI: 8-20%) compared to 8% (95% CI: 2-32%) in patients treated conservatively.

Conclusions

This systematic review is among the largest studies reporting on union rates, complication rates, and functional outcomes of acute extra-articular DHFs following operative and non-operative management. There is a need for up-to-date and high-quality comparative studies to establish a definitive gold standard treatment based on patient profiles and management goals.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

Modified medial approach for the treatment of fractures of the lower third of the humeral shaft: An anatomical study

BACKGROUND

The anatomical study of the modified medial approach for addressing fractures of the distal third of the humeral shaft aimed to elucidate the benefits of this method in providing optimal exposure for surgical intervention.

METHODS

Sixteen upper limb specimens from eight cadavers, obtained from the Anatomy Teaching Department of Fujian Medical University, were dissected. Three-dimensional anatomical structures were mapped onto a two-dimensional coordinate system. Key anatomical structures relevant to the modified medial approach, including the medial cutaneous nerve, musculocutaneous nerve, ulnar nerve, basilic vein, brachial artery, superior ulnar collateral artery, and inferior ulnar collateral artery, were documented in detail.

RESULTS

The average humeral shaft length measured (29.22 ± 2.78) cm, with its medial surface being flat and well-suited for plate fixation. The basilic vein, located superficially in the upper arm's first quadrant, measured (1.35 ± 0.35) cm from the most prominent point of the medial epicondyle of the humerus, with the deep fascia being penetrated at (12.41 ± 1.71) cm. The basilic vein serves as a key landmark for the modified medial approach. The nervi cutanei antebrachii medialis, running along the medial biceps humerus, closely accompanies the basilic vein, perforating the deep fascia above the medial epicondyle and extending anterior external and posterior medial branches. These branches are positioned (0.80 ± 0.17) cm and (0.45 ± 0.29) cm, respectively, from the basilic vein. Additionally, all nervi cutanei antebrachii medialis pass anteriorly to the basilic vein before continuing distally to the forearm. The ulnar nerve initially accompanies the basilic vein in the upper arm but diverges posteriorly without branching at (14.75 ± 1.74) cm, with the maximum separation from the basilic vein measuring (2.28 ± 0.59) cm. The brachial artery bifurcates into the superior and inferior ulnar collateral arteries along the humeral shaft. The superior collateral ulnar artery primarily supplies the ulnar nerve, positioned (14.14 ± 1.27) cm from the medial epicondyle, which ensures a sufficient blood supply for operative procedures. The musculocutaneous nerve and radial nerve branch are located in the lateral region of the brachial muscle, with minimal postoperative impact on muscle strength when splitting the brachial muscle by one-third.

CONCLUSIONS

The modified medial approach, as revealed by anatomical studies, focuses on the fracture site with a straight skin incision aligned between the most prominent point of the medial epicondyle and the midpoint of the axilla, positioned one transverse finger from the radial side. Using the basilic vein as a reference, major vessels and nerves remain undisturbed, ensuring a safe operative zone. This technique allows for significant exposure of both the anterior and external humeral shaft fracture site and the ulnar side butterfly fragment while minimizing tissue damage and facilitating rapid recovery. The approach offers notable clinical value due to its reduced invasiveness and accelerated postoperative rehabilitation.

Modified medial minimally invasive double-plating osteosynthesis techniques for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of humerus

The optimal surgical approach and placement of plates for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus are the subjects of debate. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of modified medial minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) techniques using a double technique for the treatment of distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus. A total of 30 patients with a distal third diaphyseal fracture of the humerus were selected from our hospital. Patients were seen between January 2017 and October 2022. They were treated with a modified medial approach combined with MIPO using a double plate technique. Patient demographics, operation time, bleeding volume, union time, complications, the mean fracture length (FL) and distal cortical length (DCL), and the number of screws in the distal fragment were analyzed. The function of the shoulder and elbow was evaluated using Neer's assessment of the shoulder and Mayo's assessment of the elbow. The FL was 56.1 ± 7.2 mm and the DCL was 38.3 ± 5.3 mm. The mean operative time was 84.8 ± 13.4 min (range 60-110 min). The mean blood loss during surgical treatment was 46.5 ± 10.2 ml (range 30-60 ml). Bone healing was observed in all patients from 10 to 16 weeks (average 12.1 ± 1.7) postoperatively, and one case with poor surgical wound healing was recorded. All the patients had good function of both the shoulder and elbow. The maximum flexibility of the elbow ranged from 130° to 145° (average 138.1 ± 4.8°), with a maximum flexibility straightness ranging from 0° to 5° (average 2.2 ± 1.3°). The Mayo elbow joint function score was 80-100 (average 91.4 ± 5.0). The Neer shoulder joint function score ranged from 85 to 100 (average 92.5 ± 3.9). The modified medial approach was beneficial it did not cause any iatrogenic radial nerve or ulnar nerve injuries. The anterior and the medial side plates are fixed perpendicular to the distal humerus and provide excellent stability at the same time producing better shoulder and elbow joint function.

Treatment of humeral shaft fractures: a new minimally-invasive plate osteosynthesis versus open reduction and internal fixation: a case control study

Background

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new minimally-invasive surgical approach–anteromedial minimally-invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO)–in the treatment of middle and distal humeral shaft fractures.

Methods

Fourteen patients with humeral shaft fracture treated with anteromedial MIPO from November 2016 to March 2020 (MIPO Group) were selected as the study subjects. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) were used to treat 14 patients with humeral shaft fractures as the control group (ORIF group). The two groups were fixed with a locking compression plate (LCP) or LCP + multi-directional locking screw system (MDLS). The incision length, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative fluoroscopy time, operation time, length of hospital stay, fracture healing time, QuickDASH score and Constant score were observed and compared between the two groups.

Results

Fourteen patients were enrolled in each group. The incision length (7.79 ± 2.39 cm), intraoperative blood loss (96.07 ± 14.96 mL), operative time (110.57 ± 21.90 min), hospital stay (6.29 ± 1.49 days) and fracture healing time (14.94 ± 0.99 weeks) in the MIPO group were all lower than those in the ORIF group, and the difference was statistically significant for each parameter (P < 0.05). The intraoperative fluoroscopy time (20.07 ± 3.22) in the MIPO group was significantly higher than that in the ORIF group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in age (P = 0.078), QuickDASH score (P = 0.074) or Constant score (P = 0.293) between the two groups and no postoperative complications occurred in any of the patients.

Conclusion

The anteromedial approach MIPO technique has the advantages of less trauma, less bleeding, low risk of nerve injury and high rate of fracture healing. It is one of the most effective methods for the treatment of middle and middle–distal humeral shaft fractures.

Location of the radial nerve along the humeral shaft between the prone and lateral decubitus positions at different elbow positions

Identification of the radial nerve is important during the posterior approach to a humerus fracture. During this procedure, the patient can be placed in the prone or lateral decubitus position depending on the surgeon’s preference. The distance from the radial nerve to the osseous structures will be different in each position. The purpose of this study was to identify the safety zones in various patient and elbow flexion positions. The distances from the olecranon to the center of the radial groove and intermuscular septum and lateral epicondyle to the lateral intermuscular septum were measured using a digital Vernier caliper. The measurements were performed with cadavers in the lateral decubitus and prone positions at different elbow flexion angles. The distance from where the radial nerve crossed the posterior aspect of the humerus measured from the upper part of the olecranon to the center of the radial nerve in both positions at different elbow flexion angles varied from a mean maximum distance of 130.00 mm with the elbow in full extension in the prone position to a minimum distance of 121.01 mm with the elbow in flexion at 120° in the lateral decubitus position. The mean distance of the radial nerve from the upper olecranon to the lateral intermuscular septum varied from 107.13 to 102.22 mm. The distance from the lateral epicondyle to the lateral edge of the radial nerve varied from 119.92 to 125.38 mm. There was not significant contrast in the position of the radial nerve with osseous landmarks concerning different degrees of flexion, except for 120°, which is not significant, as this flexion angle is rarely used.

Long dorsal "Y-shaped" plate for distal diaphyseal humeral fractures

BACKGROUND

Osteosynthesis of distal diaphyseal humeral fractures is challenging, especially if there is a metaphyseal extension of the fracture line with a butterfly third fragment or if the fracture is bifocal. These fractures put the radial nerve at risk at the time of the fracture and during surgery. We hypothesize that ORIF with a long dorsal Y-plate matching the dorsal aspects of the humeral diaphysis and of the two metaphyseal columns would provide a reliable method of fixation for distal diaphyseal humeral fractures even when there is a metaphyseal extension or bifocal component.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2019, 17 distal diaphyseal humeral fractures in 17 consecutive patients (14 men, 3 women, mean age 38 years) were operated on with a long "Y-shaped" dorsal plate. There were two bifocal fractures and 11 diaphyso-metaphyseal fractures with butterfly fragments. All 17 patients could be retrospectively followed up clinically and radiographically at a mean follow-up of 25 months (min 4, max 40). Clinical charts included VAS pain, elbow range of motion, QuickDASH, MEPS and subjective elbow value.

RESULTS

Bone healing was observed in all cases. Five patients (29%) had a pre-operative radial nerve palsy. All pre-operative radial nerve palsies but one recovered spontaneously. One complete radial nerve palsy that was not present before the operation was observed after surgery. It recovered spontaneously in four months. One case of post-operative elbow stiffness required a revision. Only one case (5%) showing a complication directly related to the plate (secondary displacement) required revision. Mean post-operative elbow flexion was 134°. Extension deficit averaged 13°. Subjective elbow value, QuickDASH and MEPS averaged respectively 81%, 19 points and 92 points.

DISCUSSION

Currently available plates (long dorsal straight, short dorsal "Y-shaped", long lateral) may have limitations in terms of screw purchase or biomechanical efficiency when ORIF of distal diaphyseal humeral fractures is considered. A long dorsal "Y-shaped" plate is a new alternative which may be successfully used even in the most difficult cases.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that a long dorsal "Y-shaped" plate is suitable for distal diaphyseal humeral fractures especially when there is a metaphyseal bifocal or third fragment component.

Surgical approach for fracture of distal humerus: Posterior vs lateral

Humeral fractures have an incidence of 3-5% and a bimodal age distribution. They may occur in young patients after highenergy traumas or in elderly osteoporotic patients after low-energy injuries. In nondisplaced fractures or in elderly patients, humeral fractures are treated by conservative methods. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) should be the treatment of choice in case of multi-fragmentary fractures associated with radial nerve palsy or not. ORIF is usually regarded as the gold standard treatment, but, depending on the different types of fracture, the surgical approach can change. In this review, we compare results and complication rates between lateral and posterior surgical approaches in the management of extraarticular distal humeral shaft fractures. An internet-based literature research was performed on Pubmed, Google Scholars and Cochrane Library. 265 patients were enrolled: 148 were treated by lateral or antero-lateral approach, while 117 by posterior or postero-lateral approach. The literature shows that no differences between the posterior and lateral approach exist. Certainly, the posterior approach offers undoubted advantages in terms of exposure of the fracture and visualization of the radial nerve. In our opinion, the posterior approach may also allow better management of complex and multi-fragmentary fractures.

Best care paradigm to optimize functionality after extra-articular distal humeral fractures in the young patient

For younger patients with extra-articular distal humerus fractures closed management is plagued with high rates of malunion, suboptimal functional outcomes, extended immobilization with loss of early motion, a delay in return to work, and a general period of lost productivity. Surgical management offers an appealing alternative. Maintaining respect for the triceps musculature and minimizing iatrogenic injury to the radial nerve are primary concerns with operative treatment. Accordingly, use of a triceps-sparing approach and single column plating may be the optimal treatment paradigm in the young patient presenting with an extra-articular distal humerus fracture.