Lu Shun, Wu Junwei, Xu Shihong, Fu Baisheng, Dong Jinlei, Yang Yongliang, Wang Guodong, Xin Maoyuan, Li Qinghu, He Tong-Chuan, Wang Fu, Zhou Dongsheng
Department of Orthopedics, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, 250021, China.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Chicago Medical Center, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
J Orthop Surg Res. 2016 Mar 17;11:32. doi: 10.1186/s13018-016-0366-1.
Plate fixation is the gold standard for diaphyseal fracture management, and the anterolateral approach is widely used by reconstructive surgeons. However, the outcomes of humeral shaft fracture fixation using a medial approach are rarely reported. The aim of this study is to explore the management and outcomes of humeral mid-shaft fractures fixed through a medial incision.
Thirty-four patients who sustained a humeral mid-shaft fracture and underwent an open-reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in our department between January 2010 and January 2013 were included in this study. Sixteen patients had an ORIF performed through a medial approach, while the remaining 18 were fixed through an anterolateral approach. Postoperative clinical and radiographic results were reviewed.
There were no significant differences in the blood loss and the range of motion of the shoulder and elbow between the anterolateral and medial fixation groups. One patient in the medial group and two patients in the anterolateral group had radial nerve dysfunction that improved after 8, 3 and 6 weeks, respectively. All patients healed radiographically except one from the anterolateral group who underwent grafting and re-fixation for a non-union. No vascular injuries, infections, malunions, broken plates or loose screws were noted in either group.
The medial approach to the humerus had equivalent outcomes to anterolateral fixation. It is an available choice for humeral mid-shaft fracture fixation in cases where there is no need to expose the radial nerve. The medial approach does not require a pre-bent plate and creates a large operative exposure. A well-hidden incision can also be designed, improving cosmetic outcomes. However, the medial approach is not suitable to proximal or distal humerus fractures.
钢板固定是骨干骨折治疗的金标准,重建外科医生广泛采用前外侧入路。然而,采用内侧入路治疗肱骨干骨折的结果鲜有报道。本研究旨在探讨经内侧切口固定肱骨干中段骨折的治疗方法及疗效。
本研究纳入了2010年1月至2013年1月期间在我科发生肱骨干中段骨折并接受切开复位内固定(ORIF)的34例患者。16例患者采用内侧入路进行ORIF,其余18例采用前外侧入路固定。回顾术后临床和影像学结果。
前外侧固定组和内侧固定组在失血量、肩关节和肘关节活动范围方面无显著差异。内侧组1例患者和前外侧组2例患者出现桡神经功能障碍,分别在8周、3周和6周后恢复。除前外侧组1例因骨不连接受植骨和再次固定的患者外,所有患者影像学检查均愈合。两组均未发现血管损伤、感染、畸形愈合、钢板断裂或螺钉松动。
肱骨内侧入路与前外侧固定疗效相当。在无需暴露桡神经的情况下,它是肱骨干中段骨折固定的一种可行选择。内侧入路不需要预弯钢板,可提供较大的手术视野。还可设计隐蔽的切口,改善美观效果。然而,内侧入路不适用于肱骨近端或远端骨折。