Plate fixation or intramedullary fixation of humeral shaft fractures--an update

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.

Percutaneous Intramedullary Nailing of Complex Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Retrospective Case Series

BACKGROUND

Humeral diaphyseal fractures have been traditionally stabilized with plates and screws. However, surgical morbidity can be quite extensive, particularly in more complex segmental and comminuted fracture patterns. An intramedullary nail (IMN) has the biomechanical advantage of being a load-sharing device and can be placed with a more minimally invasive technique. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of complex humeral shaft fractures treated with an IMN utilizing a percutaneous surgical technique.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on a consecutive series of patients who underwent treatment of a complex humeral shaft fracture with an IMN placed with a percutaneous technique. Clinical outcome scores and radiographic analysis were performed at a minimum one-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of the 14 patients included, 12 had clinical and radiographic follow-ups at one year. The majority (64%) were obese and involved polytrauma (50%), and 79% were AO Foundation/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) type C fractures. Union after the index procedure was 93%, with one nonunion requiring a secondary operation. The average operative time was 103 minutes. There were no other complications or additional procedures. The mean clinical outcome scores included American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES): 78.2, Constant Score: 72.1, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE): 81.9, and Penn Shoulder Score: 82.7.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates complex comminuted and segmental humeral shaft fractures in a higher-risk patient population can be effectively managed with IMN. Percutaneous placement of an IMN should be considered as a treatment option in complex humeral shaft fractures, particularly in patients with secondary comorbidities such as obesity and polytrauma.

WHICH SURGICAL TREATMENT IS PREFERABLE IN HUMERAL DIAPHYSEAL FRACTURES? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

INTRODUCTION

Humeral diaphyseal fractures are very common. Many treatments have been proposed but the choice of the best one is often complex.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the proposed study is to analyze the data in the literature in order to define the risks, advantages and disadvantages of the alternative surgical treatments (anterograde/retrograde intramedullary nailing, ORIF, MIPO).

METHODS

PubMed / Medline and Google Scholar were searched for prospective randomized or case-control retrospective studies about surgical treatment of humeral diaphyseal fractures with nailing, ORIF and MIPO, according to PRISMA guidelines. The primary outcome considered was the fracture healing time by comparing nailing-ORIF, nailing-MIPO and ORIF-MIPO. Differences in the rate of post-operative complications, patient satisfaction, intra-operative blood loss and surgical time were considered secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

506 studies were identified, but only 10 studies were valid for the systematic review. No differences between nailing, ORIF and MIPO were recorded in terms of healing and surgical times. Intra-operative blood loss was significantly higher during ORIF (p 0.024). No differences were found in the restoration of function evaluated using clinical scales. The rate of complications was 27.4% for nailing, 21.2% for ORIF and 13.8% for MIPO. The difference was statistically significant only by comparing nailing with MIPO (p 0.012), probably because anterograde nailing is more often correlated to shoulder impairment. ORIF was at higher risk of infection compared to nailing (p 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Humeral diaphyseal fractures require careful pre-operative planning, ensuring reduced healing time, less soft tissue damage and low rate of complications. The lower exposure of the fracture allows for excellent results with reduced bleeding and lower risk of complications.

Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of Intramedullary Nail and Locking Compression Plate in the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective

The surgical treatment scheme of humeral shaft fracture is still controversial with no consensus reached. This meta-analysis was aimed at comparing the efficacy and safety of intramedullary nail (IMN) and locking compression plate (LCP) in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures.

Methods

PubMed, Medline, Embase, Ovid, Cochrane Library, ISI Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and Chinese databases, including China National Knowledge Infrastructure Project, Wanfang database, and China biomedical abstracts database, were used to search the literature. Review Manager software was employed for statistical analysis and establishing forest and funnel maps. Categorical variables were measured by relative risk (RR), and standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to measure continuous variables. 95% confidence intervals were used for each variable. The modified Jadad scale, Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and Cochrane's bias risk tools were used to evaluate the bias and risk of eligible studies.

Results

A total of 14 studies were included in the analysis with a total of 903 patients with humeral shaft fracture. Significant differences with regard to operation time (Std = -1.18, 95% CI: -2.14, -0.22, Z = 2.41, P = 0.02), blood loss (Std = -2.97, 95% CI: -4.32, -1.63, Z = 4.34, P < 0.001), and postoperative infection rate (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: -0.15, 0.68, Z = 2.98, P = 0.003) were noted between the IMN group and LCP group. In addition, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score (Std = -0.22, 95% CI: -0.44, 0.01, Z = 2.08, P = 0.04) and the rate of shoulder and elbow function limitation (RR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.06, 3.33, Z = 2.17, P = 0.03) between the 2 groups were also statistically significant. There were no significant differences in the rate of radial nerve injury, nonunion, delayed healing, and secondary operation between the two groups.

Conclusion

IMN is superior than the LCP in terms of the operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative infection, suggesting its superiority in the humeral shaft fracture fixation. However, IMN is inferior to LCP in ASES score and shoulder elbow function limitation rate, indicating poor early postoperative functional recovery. More studies are required to evaluate and analyze the clinical efficacy between IMN and LCP regarding long-term function after artificial graft removal.

Comparison of direct surgical cost for humeral shaft fracture fixation: open reduction internal fixation versus intramedullary nailing

Background and/or Hypothesis

Prior literature has supported similar complication rates and outcomes for humeral shaft fractures treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) with a plate/screw construct versus intramedullary nailing (IMN). The purpose of this study is to determine whether surgical encounter total direct costs (SETDCs) differ between ORIF and IMN for these fractures.

Methods

Adult patients (≥ 18 years) treated for isolated humeral shaft fractures by ORIF or IMN between June 18, 2014 and June 17, 2019 at a single tertiary academic center were available for inclusion. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN groups, obtained through our institution's information technology value tool, were adjusted to 2019 US dollars and converted to relative costs per institutional policy. SETDCs for ORIF and IMN were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test.

Results

Demographic factors did not differ between ORIF and IMN cohorts with the exception of age (mean of 18.6 years older for IMN; P < .001) and American Society of Anesthesiologist class (higher for IMN; P = .029). Substantial cost variation was observed among the 39 included ORIF and 21 IMN cases. Costs pertaining to operating room utilization (P = .77), implants (P = .64), and the recovery room (P = .27) were similar for ORIF and IMN, whereas supply costs were significantly greater for IMN with a median (interquartile range) of 0.21 (0.17 ∼ 0.28), more than twice the supply costs of ORIF (0.09 [0.05 ∼ 0.13], P < .001). The SETDC of IMN was significantly greater than that of ORIF (median [interquartile range]:1.00 [0.9 to 1.13] vs. 0.83 [0.71∼1.05], respectively; P = .047).

Discussion and/or Conclusion

Our study found that the SETDC for humeral shaft fracture fixation was greater for IMN than for ORIF, although patient cohorts differed significantly with respect to age and the American Society of Anesthesiologist class. Surgeons should take these findings into consideration when consenting patients with humeral shaft fractures for the appropriate fixation type.

Plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing of proximal humerus fractures: an ACS NSQIP-based comparative analysis over 8 years

PURPOSE

The primary goal of this study was to compare the utilization of plate versus intramedullary nail (IMN) in the treatment of humerus fractures. Secondarily, we sought to examine whether any differences in demographics and clinical course of patients who receive a nail versus plate affect the procedure selection process.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database was queried for patients surgically treated for a humeral shaft fracture from the years 2007-2015, using current procedural terminology (CPT) code. Patients with overlapping procedures, nonunion, polytrauma, and malignancy were excluded. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was calculated to compare preoperative comorbidities. A two-sample Wilcoxon rank-sum (Mann-Whitney U) test was used to compare numerical values, whereas the Fisher exact and Chi-squared analyses were performed to compare categorical variables. A p value < 0.05 was considered significant. Preoperative variables with a p value < 0.05 and a clinical prevalence > 1%, indicating statistical and clinical significance, were included in a logistic regression for multivariate analysis to identify any independent predictors for procedure selection (IMN versus PF) based on preoperative patient characteristics.

RESULTS

During the study period plate fixation increased from 7 cases per year to 272 cases per year, while IMN increased from 8 cases per year to 80 cases per year. IMNs were mostly in older patients (63.85 vs 56.19 years, p < 0.001), and patients with a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (4.64 vs 2.79, p < 0.001). IMN was associated with shorter operation times (104 min vs 128 min, p < 0.001) and longer lengths of hospital stay (3.43d vs 2.78d, p < 0.001). No significant differences in overall complication rates were seen between patients who received IMN versus PF. However, the postoperative mortality rate was higher in patients who received IMN compared to PF (2.19% vs 0.40%, p < 0.01). Based on the regression analysis, patient age was the only independent patient factor demonstrated to predict the utilization of IMN over PF in older patients with humeral shaft fractures p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

According to this NSQIP-based analysis, the rate of PF and IMN utilization increased in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures over a period of 8 years, but PF was performed at an overall a higher rate than IMN. Intramedullary nailing was preferred over PF in older patients with more comorbidities. The last possibly contributed to the higher 30-day mortality rate observed in patients who received IMN compared to PF.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Retrospective comparative study.

Antegrade intramedullary nail versus plate fixation in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures: An update meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus regarding the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fracture. The present meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN) and plating for humeral shaft fracture.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Clinical Trails, Ovid, ISI Web of Science, and Chinese databases including WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched through March 10, 2019. The Review Manager software was adapted to perform statistical analysis and relative risk (RR) were used for the binary variables, and weighted mean difference and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to measure the continuous variables. Each variable included its 95% confidence interval (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 15 trials with 839 patients were included in the analysis. There was significant difference between IMN group and plate group in blood loss (SMD = 3.49, 95% CI: 1.19, 5.79, P = .003) and postoperative infections (RR = 3.04, 95% CI: 1.49, 6.24, P = .002). Additionally, significant difference was observed between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) group and IMN group in nonunion rate (RR = 3.20, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.84, P = .02). Statistical significance was also observed between the open reduction plate fixation group and IMN group in restriction of shoulder and elbow joints results (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.96, P < .05). No significant difference was observed for the operation time, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, nerve injury, delayed union, reoperation in either group.

CONCLUSION

IMN may be superior to plate in reducing blood loss and postoperative infections for the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, MIPO was superior to IMN group in nonunion and equal to IMN in other parameters. Further research is required and future studies should include analysis of assessments at different stages and follow-up after removal of the implants.

Open reduction and internal fixation of humeral shaft fractures versus conservative treatment with a functional brace: a study protocol of a randomised controlled trial embedded in a cohort

INTRODUCTION

Humeral shaft fractures represent 1%-3% of all fractures and 20% of humeral fractures in adults. The treatment of these fractures is mainly conservative and operative treatment is usually reserved for specific circumstances. To date, no randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures with conservative treatment.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct an RCT to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. After providing informed consent, 80 patients from 18 years of age with humeral shaft fracture will be randomly assigned to open reduction and internal fixation with locking plate or conservative treatment with functional bracing. We will follow the patients for 10 years and compare the results at different time points. The primary outcome will be Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) at 12 months. The secondary outcomes will include Numerical Rating Scale for pain at rest and in activities, Constant Score and quality of life instrument 15D. Patients not willing to participate in the RCT will be asked to participate in a prospective cohort follow-up study, 'the declined cohort'. This cohort will be followed up at the same time points as the randomised patients to assess the potential effect of participation bias on RCT results and to enhance the external validity of the RCT. In one of the recruiting centres, all cooperative patients with humeral shaft fractures not eligible for randomisation will be asked to participate in a 'non-eligible cohort' study. We will use blinded data interpretation of the randomised cohort to avoid biased interpretation of outcomes. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically relevant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups. We will consider a difference of a minimum of 10 points in DASH clinically relevant.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The institutional review board of the Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District has approved the protocol. We will disseminate the findings of this study through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01719887; pre-results.

Fracture union in closed interlocking nail in humeral shaft fractures

Background:

Fracture shaft humerus is a major cause of morbidity in patients with upper extremity injuries. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of interlocking nail in humeral shaft fractures.

Methods:

This study was conducted in the Department of Orthopedic Surgery in SMS and R Sharda University from January 2010 to November 2013. Seventy-eight patients were recruited from emergency and out-patient department having a close fracture of humerus shaft. All patients were operated under general anesthesia and closed reamed interlocking nailing was done. All patients were followed for 9 months.

Results:

Out of 78 patients, 69 patients underwent union in 90–150 days with a mean of 110.68 days. Complications found in four patients who had nonunion, and five patients had delayed union, which was treated with bone grafting. All the patients were assessed clinically and radiologically for fracture healing, joint movements and implant failure. The results were excellent in 88.46% and good in 6.41% patients. Complete subjective, functional, and clinical recovery had occurred in almost 100% of the patients.

Conclusions:

The results of the present study indicates that in the presence of proper indications, reamed antegrade intramedullary interlocked nailing appears to be a method of choice for internal fixation of osteoporotic and pathologic fractures.