Minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis for mid-distal third humeral shaft fractures

Functional and Clinical Outcomes After Plate Osteosynthesis Versus Intramedullary Nailing of a Humeral Shaft Fracture: The Results of the HUMMER Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Plate osteosynthesis (referred to throughout as plating) and intramedullary nailing (referred to throughout as nailing) are the most common operative strategies for humeral shaft fractures. However, it is undecided which treatment is more effective. This study aimed to compare functional and clinical outcomes of these treatment strategies. We hypothesized that plating would result in an earlier recovery of shoulder function and fewer complications.

METHODS

From October 23, 2012, to October 3, 2018, adults with a humeral shaft fracture, OTA/AO type 12A or 12B, were enrolled in a multicenter, prospective cohort study. Patients were treated with plating or nailing. Outcome measures included the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Constant-Murley score, ranges of motion of the shoulder and elbow, radiographic healing, and complications until 1 year. Repeated-measure analysis was done with correction for age, sex, and fracture type.

RESULTS

Of the 245 included patients, 76 were treated with plating and 169 were treated with nailing. Patients in the plating group were younger, with a median age of 43 years compared with 57 years for the nailing group (p < 0.001). The mean DASH score after plating improved faster over time, but did not differ significantly from the score after nailing at 12 months (11.7 points [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.6 to 15.7 points]) for plating and 11.2 points [95% CI, 8.3 to 14.0 points] for nailing). The Constant-Murley score and shoulder abduction, flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation displayed a significant treatment effect (p treatment ≤ 0.001), in favor of plating. The plating group had 2 implant-related complications, whereas the nailing group had 24, including 13 nail protrusions and 8 screw protrusions. Plating resulted in more postoperative temporary radial nerve palsy (8 patients [10.5%] compared with 1 patient [0.6%]; p < 0.001) and a trend toward fewer nonunions (3 patients [5.7%] compared with 16 patients [11.9%]; p = 0.285) than nailing.

CONCLUSIONS

Plating of a humeral shaft fracture in adults results in faster recovery, especially of shoulder function. Plating was associated with more temporary nerve palsies, but fewer implant-related complications and surgical reinterventions, than nailing. Despite heterogeneity in implants and surgical approach, plating seems to be the preferred treatment option for these fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Treatment of humeral shaft fractures with different treatment methods: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

PURPOSE

Humeral shaft fractures (HSFs) can be treated non-operatively (Non-OP), with open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), or with intramedullary nails (IMN). However, the best treatment for HSFs still remains controversial.We performed a network meta-analysis to explore which should be the best method for HSFs.

METHODS

The computerized search had been conducted on electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Medline from the establishment of the database to the end of December 2022. The quality evaluation of the included literature had been completed by Review Manager (version 5.4.1). Stata 17.0 software (Stata Corporation, College Station, Texas, USA)was used for network meta-analysis.We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different treatments to treating HSFs.

RESULTS

The pairwise comparison results demonstrated that there was no statistical difference between IMN, MIPO, Non-OP, and ORPO in terms of radial nerve injury and infection, and Non-OP presented significantly more nonunion than ORPO, IMN, and MIPO. However, no statistically significant difference between ORPO, IMN, and MIPO was discovered. The results of the network meta-analysis displayed that surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities of IMN, MIPO, Non-OP, and ORPO in radial nerve injury were 46.5%, 66.9%, 77.3%, and 9.3%, respectively, in contrast, that in infection were 68.6%, 53.3%, 62.4%, and 15.4%, respectively, and that in nonunion were 51.7%, 93.1%, 0.7%, and 54.5%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

We came to the conclusion that MIPO is currently the most effective way to treat HSFs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Name of the registry: Prospero, 2. Unique Identifying number or registration ID: CRD42023411293.

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.

Treating multifocal humerus fractures: A comparison between the mipo technique and intramedullary nailing

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Proximal humerus fractures with metaphysodiaphyseal extension represent a challenge for the orthopedic surgeon due to their reduced incidence and the difficulty in the treatment decision. These can be treated with an intramedullary nail or using the MIPO technique, associating different advantages and complications depending on the procedure. The objective of this study was to compare metaphyseal-diaphyseal fractures of the humerus treated with antegrade intramedullary nailing and those operated using the MIPO technique to see if there were significant differences in terms of functional, clinical, and radiological results.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

retrospective, analytical and unicentric review of 29 patients with proximal fracture with metaphyseal-diaphyseal extension treated by MIPO technique and 33 patients surgically treated by antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN) in our hospital from 2014 to 2020. Demographic, functional, radiographic and clinical data were obtained..

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between both groups in terms of fracture mechanism (p=0.34), fracture type (p=0.13) or Maresca classification (p=0.32). Surgical time was significantly shorter in the IMN group compared to the MIPO technique (p=0.014). No significant difference was observed regarding the need for blood transfusion (p=0.32). The mean consolidation in the MIPO group was 21 weeks compared to 21 weeks in the IMN, with no significant differences between both groups (p= 0.88). No significant differences were observed between CONSTANT test at one year in the MIPO group versus the IMN group (p=0.79), nor in radial nerve palsies (p=0.28).

CONCLUSIONS

Proximal fractures with metaphyseal-diaphyseal extension are a challenge for the orthopedic surgeon due to the infrequency, the complexity of these fractures and the fact that there is no established consensus on the ideal treatment for this type of injury. Both the MIPO technique with the Philos plate and the intramedullary nail are valid options for the treatment of these fractures, with no differences observed in terms of fracture consolidation time or in terms of functional results.

Fragility of statistically significant findings from randomized clinical trials of surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite recent meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there remains no consensus regarding the preferred surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures. The fragility index (FI) is an emerging tool used to evaluate the robustness of RCTs by quantifying the number of participants in a study group that would need to switch outcomes in order to reverse the study conclusions.

AIM

To investigate the fragility index of randomized control trials assessing outcomes of operative fixation in proximal humerus fractures.

METHODS

We completed a systematic review of RCTs evaluating the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures. Inclusion criteria included: articles published in English; patients randomized and allotted in 1:1 ratio to 2 parallel arms; and dichotomous outcome variables. The FI was calculated for total complications, each complication individually, and secondary surgeries using the Fisher exact test, as previously published.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs were included in the analysis comparing open reduction plate osteosynthesis with dynamic compression plate or locking compression plate, intramedullary nail, and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. The median FI was 0 for all parameters analyzed. Regarding individual outcomes, the FI was 0 for 81/91 (89%) of outcomes. The FI exceeded the number lost to follow up in only 2/91 (2%) outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The FI shows that data from RCTs regarding operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures are fragile and does not demonstrate superiority of any particular surgical technique.

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.

Preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound combined with MIPPO for treatment of middle-inferior humerus fractures

Background and purpose

Open reduction and internal fixation through the posterior approach are standard methods for treating middle-inferior humerus fractures. Given the limited operative field and difficulty in locating the radial nerve, the minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) technique via the posterior approach to treat middle-inferior humerus fractures has rarely been reported. This study aims to evaluate the clinical effect of the preoperative study of the radial nerve position by B-ultrasound and its intraoperative protection combined with MIPPO in managing middle-inferior humerus fractures.

Methods

The data were studied retrospectively involving 64 participants who had surgery for middle-inferior humerus fractures from the start of 2017 to the end of 2020. Participants were divided into two groups, those treated with the MIPPO technique, including newly developed dual procedures and preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound (group A), and those treated with open reduction and internal plating fixation (group B).

Results

All the cases were followed up for 12–34 months (an average of 25.6 ± 8.76 months), and there was no significant difference in the mean operative duration, surgical incision infection, range of motion (ROM) and MEPS (Mayo elbow performance score) for groups A and B. However, the occurrence of complications (radial nerve palsy, bone nonunion and flexible internal fixation or ruptures) in group B was significantly higher than the group A. A statistically significant difference was observed in the intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay and fracture nonunion time between the two groups. All the cases gained bone union within the MIPPO group.

Conclusion

MIPPO via the posterior dual approach associated with preoperative position and protection of radial nerve by B-ultrasound does not increase radial nerve injury, however, it exhibits obvious advantages in the bone union, which is worthy of clinical application.

Anterior Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis for Humeral Shaft Fractures Is Safer Than Open Reduction Internal Fixation: A Matched Case-Controlled Comparison

OBJECTIVE

Compare anterior minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) to open reduction/internal fixation (ORIF) for humeral shaft fractures, assessing complications and clinical outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective matched case-controlled cohort.

SETTING

Tertiary referral trauma centre.

PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS

Humeral shaft fractures identified retrospectively over 5 years; 31 were treated by MIPO and 54 by ORIF. Matched-case cohort assembled according to fracture pattern, sex, age, and comorbidities, with 56 total patients (28 per group).

INTERVENTIONS

MIPO and ORIF.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Complication rate was the primary outcome (radial nerve injury, nonunion, infection, and reoperation). Radiographic alignment and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Cumulative complication rates were 3.6% after anterior MIPO and 35.7% after ORIF (P = 0.0004). The only complication after anterior MIPO was a nonunion, managed with revision ORIF and bone graft. The ORIF group had 10 complications, including 5 superficial infections, 4 iatrogenic radial nerve injuries, and 1 nonunion. The mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score after MIPO was 17.0 ± 18.0 and after ORIF was 24.9 ± 19.5. The mean coronal plane angulation after MIPO was 1.8 ± 1.3 degrees and after ORIF was 1.0 ± 1.2 degrees. The mean sagittal plane angulation after MIPO was 3.0 ± 2.9 degrees and after ORIF was 1.0 ± 1.2 degrees.

CONCLUSIONS

The cumulative complication rate was 10 times higher after ORIF of humeral shaft fractures compared with the MIPO technique. MIPO achieved nearly equivalent radiographic alignment, with no clinically meaningful differences observed. MIPO is the safer option and should be considered for patients with humeral shaft fractures that would benefit from surgical intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

MIPO versus nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies

PURPOSE

There is no consensus on the optimal operative technique for humeral shaft fractures. This meta-analysis aims to compare minimal-invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with nail fixation for humeral shaft fractures regarding healing, complications and functional results.

METHODS

PubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing MIPO with nailing for humeral shaft fractures. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models and presented as weighted odds ratio (OR), risk difference (RD), mean difference (MD) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Analyses were repeated stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies).

RESULTS

A total of 2 RCTs (87 patients) and 5 observational studies (595 patients) were included. The effects estimated in observational studies and RCTs were similar in direction and magnitude for all outcomes except operation duration. MIPO has a lower risk for non-union (RD 7%; OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1-0.5) and re-intervention (RD 13%; OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8). Functional shoulder (SMD 1.0, 95% CI 0.2-1.8) and elbow scores (SMD 0.4, 95% CI 0-0.8) were better among patients treated with MIPO. The risk for radial nerve palsy following surgery was equal (RD 2%; OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.3-1.2) and nerve function recovered spontaneously in all patients in both groups. No difference was detected with regard to infection, time to union and operation duration.

CONCLUSION

MIPO has a considerable lower risk for non-union and re-intervention, leads to better shoulder function and, to a lesser extent, better elbow function compared to nailing. Although nailing appears to be a viable option, the evidence suggests that MIPO should be the preferred treatment of choice. The learning curve of minimal-invasive plating should, however, be taken into account when interpreting these results.

Comparison between osteosynthesis with interlocking nail and minimally invasive plating for proximal- and middle-thirds of humeral shaft fractures

PURPOSE

Options for the treatment of proximal- and middle-thirds of humeral shaft fractures include intramedullary interlocking nail (IMN) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO). However, whether IMN provides better clinical outcomes than MIPO surgical technique still remains unclear. This study was designed to compare clinical outcomes of the IMN with MIPO technique for the treatment of proximal- and middle-thirds of humeral shaft fractures.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort analysis of 55 proximal- and middle-thirds of humeral shaft fractures surgically treated using IMN (n = 25) or MIPO (n = 30) from January 2012 to January 2016. Peri-operative and follow-up data (a minimum of 1 year) of the patients (aged from 18 to 56 years) were collected. Operative time, union time, VAS scores, surgery-related complications, and implant removal rate were compared between the two groups in this study. Besides, the functional outcomes were evaluated using the Rating Scale of American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons' Form (ASES) and Mayo Elbow Performance Score System (MEPS).

RESULT

We found significantly shorter operative time and much less blood loss in IMN group, and lower VAS scores in the IMN group after surgery at first and third months but not at the sixth month. Complication rate was found to be relatively higher in the MIPO group when compared to the IMN group. No significant difference was observed between these two groups regarding ASES and MEPS scores. Three patients in the MIPO group suffered iatrogenic radial nerve injury and recovered after four to five months later. No implant failures occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

Intramedullary interlocking nail seemed to be superior to minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis in the treatment of proximal- and middle-thirds of humeral shaft fractures due to shorter operative time and union time, less early post-operative pain, and fewer complications. The intramedullary interlocking nail could be considered a better surgical option for the management of proximal middle humeral fractures, though it may also depend on the surgeons' skills and learning curve. Further in-depth prospective studies are in great need to verify our conclusion.

Intramedullary Nailing and Minimally Invasive Percutaneous Plate Osteosynthesis in Treatment of Displaced Clavicular Mid-shaft Fractures: A Prospective Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the difference between MIPO and IMN methods in the treatment of displaced clavicular mid-shaft fractures.

METHODS

A total 163 patients were consecutively enrolled and randomly divided into the MIPO group or the IMN group. Clinical characteristics and outcomes including age, gender, causes of fractures, and AO/OTA type as well as hospitalization time, healing time, and postoperative complications were analyzed. Constant-Murley scores and DASH scores were used for assessment of shoulder joint and upper extremity function, respectively.

RESULTS

In this study, 82 cases received MIPO and 81 cases received IMN. The mean operation time, mean bleeding volume, mean hospitalization time, and mean healing time showed no significant difference between the MIPO and IMN groups. At 3 months after surgery, Constant-Murley scores were significantly higher and DASH scores were significantly lower in the MIPO group than the IMN group. No significant difference was observed for both indexes at 6 months. The fracture nonunion rate was significantly lower in the MIPO group. No significant difference was found in other complications.

CONCLUSION

Both methods were effective for the treatment of displaced clavicular mid-shaft fractures. However, the MIPO method might be better for recovery of shoulder and upper extremity function in the short term and might have a lower nonunion rate.

Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis of Humeral Shaft Fractures: Current State of the Art

Most closed humeral shaft fractures can be successfully managed nonsurgically. However, fractures for which closed treatment is unsuccessful are stabilized using either plates or intramedullary nails. There are shortcomings associated with each technique, including the potential complications of nonunion, infection, shoulder pain, and radial nerve injury. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), an innovative alternative treatment, is gaining in popularity. This technique is based on the anterior humeral shaft providing a relatively safe surface for plate application, and limited open exposures proximally and distally allow percutaneous insertion of the necessary implant. More than 40 articles have been published regarding MIPO, and it compares favorably to other available forms of treatment with excellent functional outcomes and a lower rate of iatrogenic radial nerve injury. Larger randomized controlled trials comparing this method with other accepted techniques, including nonsurgical management, are necessary to better define the role of MIPO in the management of humeral shaft fractures.

Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis versus conventional open insertion techniques for osteosynthesis

Osteosynthesis has evolved theoretically and practically throughout its evolution. Similar to trends in other surgical fields, surgical techniques in fracture fixation, such as minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), have moved from large dissections to more tissue sparing methods. These plating techniques have been developed for a variety of bones, but more universal clinical adoption will rely upon improved clinical outcomes. The current review will describe minimally invasive techniques, evaluate their rationale, and summarize evidence for their efficacy.

Surgical interventions to treat humerus shaft fractures: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There are three main surgical techniques to treat humeral shaft fractures: open reduction and plate fixation (ORPF), intramedullary nail (IMN) fixation, and minimally invasive percutaneous osteosynthesis (MIPO). We performed a network meta-analysis to compare three surgical procedures, including ORPF, IMN fixation, and MIPO, to provide the optimum treatment for humerus shaft fractures.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, and Cochrane library were researched for reports published up to May 2016. We only included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing two or more of the three surgical procedures, including the ORPF, IMN, and MIPO techniques, for humeral shaft fractures in adults. The methodological quality was evaluated based on the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We used WinBUGS1.4 to conduct this Bayesian network meta-analysis. We used the odd ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) to calculate the dichotomous outcomes and analyzed the percentages of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve.

RESULTS

Seventeen eligible publications reporting 16 RCTs were included in this study. Eight hundred and thirty-two participants were randomized to receive one of three surgical procedures. The results showed that shoulder impingement occurred more commonly in the IMN group than with either ORPF (OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03-0.37) or MIPO fixation (OR, 0.08; 95% CI, 0.00-0.69). Iatrogenic radial nerve injury occurred more commonly in the ORPF group than in the MIPO group (OR, 11.09; 95% CI, 1.80-124.20). There were no significant differences among the three procedures in nonunion, delayed union, and infection.

CONCLUSION

Compared with IMN and ORPF, MIPO technique is the preferred treatment method for humeral shaft fractures.

Biomechanical Study of the Fixation Strength of Anteromedial Plating for Humeral Shaft Fractures

Background:

Open reduction and internal fixation with plate and screws are the gold standard for the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures, this study was to compare the mechanical properties of anteromedial, anterolateral, and posterior plating for humeral shaft fractures.

Methods:

A distal third humeral shaft fracture model was constructed using fourth-generation sawbones (#3404, composite bone). A total of 24 sawbones with a distal third humeral shaft fracture was randomly divided into three Groups: A, B, and C (n = 8 in each group) for anteromedial, anterolateral, and posterior plating, respectively. All sawbones were subjected to horizontal torsional fatigue tests, horizontal torsional and axial compressive fatigue tests, four-point bending fatigue tests in anteroposterior (AP) and mediolateral (ML) directions and horizontal torsional destructive tests.

Results:

In the horizontal torsional fatigue tests, the mean torsional angle amplitude in Groups A, B, and C were 6.12°, 6.53°, and 6.81°. In horizontal torsional and axial compressive fatigue tests, the mean torsional angle amplitude in Groups A, B, and C were 5.66°, 5.67°, and 6.36°. The mean plate displacement amplitude was 0.05 mm, 0.08 mm, and 0.10 mm. Group A was smaller than Group C (P < 0.05). In AP four-point bending fatigue tests, the mean plate displacement amplitude was 0.16 mm, 0.13 mm, and 0.20 mm. Group B was smaller than Group C (P < 0.05). In ML four-point bending fatigue tests, the mean plate displacement amplitude were 0.16 mm, 0.19 mm, and 0.17 mm. In horizontal torsional destructive tests, the mean torsional rigidity in Groups A, B, and C was 0.82, 0.75, and 0.76 N·m/deg. The yielding torsional angle was 24.50°, 25.70°, and 23.86°. The mean yielding torque was 18.46, 18.05, and 16.83 N·m, respectively.

Conclusions:

Anteromedial plating was superior to anterolateral or posterior plating in all mechanical tests except in AP four-point bending fatigue tests compared to the anterolateral plating group. We can suggest that anteromedial plating is a clinically safe and effective way for humeral shaft fractures.

A Bayesian network meta-analysis of three different surgical procedures for the treatment of humeral shaft fractures

BACKGROUND

The optimal surgical procedure for humeral shaft fractures remains a matter of debate. We aimed to establish the optimum procedure by performing a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Medline were searched for both randomized controlled trials and prospective studies of surgical treatment for humeral shaft fractures. The quality of the included studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration's "Risk of bias".

RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs or prospective studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that the occurrence rate of radial nerve injury was lowest for minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO; SUCRA probability, 95.1%), followed by open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO; SUCRA probability, 29.5%), and was highest for intramedullary nailing (IMN; SUCRA probability, 25.4%). The aggregated results of pairwise meta-analysis showed no significant difference in radial nerve injury rate when comparing ORPO versus IMN (OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.96 to 3.86), ORPO versus MIPO (OR, 3.38; 95% CI, 0.80 to 14.31), or IMN versus MIPO (OR, 3.19; 95% CI, 0.48 to 21.28). Regarding the nonunion, SUCRA probabilities were 90.5%, 40.2%, and 19.3% for MIPO, ORPO, and IMN, respectively. The aggregated results of a pairwise meta-analysis also showed no significant difference for ORPO versus IMN (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.69), ORPO versus MIPO (OR, 2.42; 95% CI, 0.45 to 12.95), or IMN versus MIPO (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 0.35 to 17.64).

CONCLUSION

The current evidence indicates that MIPO is the optimum choice in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures and that ORPO is superior to IMN.

Minimally invasive plating versus either open reduction and plate fixation or intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes and complications between anterior humeral minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and the 2 standard techniques, either open reduction and plating or humeral nailing.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar to identify relevant randomized controlled trials in the English- and German-language literature. Eligibility criteria included randomized controlled trials comparing at least 1 surgical intervention with MIPO and reporting the primary clinical outcome using a validated functional scoring system and description of complications. Publication bias was assessed by funnel plot, and the risk of bias was established using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ(2) and I(2) statistics.

RESULTS

Eight prospective randomized studies (N = 376) met the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled estimate for clinical outcome showed that MIPO resulted in a significantly better outcome (standardized mean difference, 0.366; 95% confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.571; P = .0001; I(2) = 61%). The pooled estimate for all complications showed that the open reduction-internal fixation/nail group had a significantly higher complication rate (odds ratio, 0.507; 95% confidence interval, 0.285 to 0.905; P = .021; I(2) = 97%).

CONCLUSION

Current evidence indicates the MIPO approach has better clinical outcomes with a lower rate of complications compared with alternative surgical techniques. However, the results of this meta-analysis are limited by problems inherent in the primary studies, including poor reporting of randomization protocols, as well as possible attrition bias and reporting bias, of the primary studies. Future publications may therefore change the trend of the pooled estimate in either direction.

Minimally Invasive Plating Osteosynthesis in the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether minimally invasive plating osteosynthesis (MIPO) or other operative interventions is superior in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures remains controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively compare the clinical outcomes of MIPO and other operative interventions in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures.

METHODS

Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science were systematically searched to identify all available studies comparing clinical outcomes between patients receiving MIPO and other operative interventions. The weight mean difference (WMD) was pooled to compare the operative time, union time, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) score, and Mayo elbow performance index (MEPI).The risk ratio (RR) was pooled to compare the union rate, and incidence of complications. Pooled estimates were calculated by using a fixed-effects model or a randomized-effects model, according to the heterogeneity among studies.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in this meta-analysis. Our results suggest that both MIPO and other operative interventions can achieve similar union time, UCLA score, MEPI, and union rate. However, MIPO is associated with better outcomes including shorter operation time, and lower incidence of radial nerve injury.

CONCLUSION

Evidence from this meta-analysis demonstrated that, MIPO is effective but safer than other operative interventions in the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, due to the potential limitations in this meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes using appropriate blinding methods are needed to confirm these findings.

Comparison of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis and conventional plate osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fracture: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and conventional plate osteosynthesis (CPO) for humeral shaft fracture.

METHODS

Potential academic articles were identified from the Cochrane Library, Medline (1966-2016.3), PubMed (1966-2016.3), Embase (1980-2016.3), and ScienceDirect (1966-2016.3). Gray studies were identified from the references of the included literature. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCT involving MIPO and CPO for humeral shaft fracture were included. Two independent reviewers performed independent data abstraction. I statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. Fixed or random effects model was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Two RCTs and 3 non-RCTs met the inclusion criteria. There was a lower incidence of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy in patients with MIPO (P = 0.006). There was no statistically significant difference in in the risk of developing nonunion, delay union, malformation, screw loosening, infection, operation time, UCLA, and MEPS function score between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

MIPO decreased incidence of iatrogenic radial nerve palsy and is an efficacy and safety technique for humeral shaft fracture. Due to the limited quality and data of the evidence currently available, more high-quality RCTs are required.

Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis vs conventional fixation techniques for surgically treated humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis

Background

In this study, we performed a meta-analysis to identify whether minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) was superior to conventional fixation techniques (CFT) for treating humeral shaft fractures.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted up to February 2016 in ScienceDirect, Springer, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases for relevant papers that compared the outcomes of MIPO with CFT, such as open reduction with plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and intramedullary nail (IMN) for treating humeral shaft fractures. Meta-analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.0 software.

Results

According to the search strategy, eight studies that covered 391 patients were enrolled, including four randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two prospective cohort trials, and two retrospective cohort trials. Our meta-analysis did not detect any significant difference between MIPO and CFT (IMN and ORPO) in terms of operative time, fracture union rate, and fracture union time. However, MIPO has a less rate of complications and iatrogenic radial nerve palsy than that of ORPO and higher adjacent joint function scores than those of IMN (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Based on the present evidence, this meta-analysis suggested that MIPO was a better choice for treating humeral shaft fractures than CFT. However, more high-quality randomized trials are still needed to further confirm this conclusion in the future.

Posterior minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) of distal third humeral shaft fractures with segmental isolation of the radial nerve

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes of a cohort of patients with distal third humeral shaft fractures treated using a posterior minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) technique. Twenty-one patients were retrospectively evaluated, 13 men and 8 women with an average age of 37 years. The surgery was performed through two posterior incisions away from the fracture site. The radial nerve was identified and protected. The fracture was fixed with a narrow 4.5/5.0mm locking compression plate. After an average follow-up of 22 months, flexion-extension of the elbow was 138°±7°, with a range of motion of 131°. Shoulder motion was 160° in forward flexion, 59° in external rotation, and internal rotation was to the spinous process of 9th thoracic vertebra. Pain severity was 0.5 on the VAS. The DASH score was 9. Average Constant score was 84. MEPI was 97. Fracture union was obtained in all patients. One patient developed transient postoperative radial nerve palsy. These results demonstrate that the posterior MIPO technique is a reliable option for treating distal third humeral shaft fractures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

Fracture of distal humerus: MIPO technique with visualization of the radial nerve

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the outcomes in patients treated for humerus distal third fractures with MIPO technique and visualization of the radial nerve by an accessory approach, in those without radial palsy before surgery.

METHODS

The patients were treated with MIPO technique. The visualization and isolation of the radial nerve was done by an approach between the brachialis and the brachiorradialis, with an oblique incision, in the lateral side of the arm. MEPS was used to evaluate the elbow function.

RESULTS

Seven patients were evaluated with a mean age of 29.8 years old. The average follow up was 29.85 months. The radial neuropraxis after surgery occurred in three patients. The sensorial recovery occurred after 3.16 months on average and also of the motor function, after 5.33 months on average, in all patients. We achieved fracture consolidation in all patients (M=4.22 months). The averages for flexion-extension and prono-supination were 112.85° and 145°, respectively. The MEPS average score was 86.42. There was no case of infection.

CONCLUSION

This approach allowed excluding a radial nerve interposition on site of the fracture and/or under the plate, showing a high level of consolidation of the fracture and a good evolution of the range of movement of the elbow. Level of Evidence IV, Case Series.