Bhayana Himanshu, Chouhan Devendra Kumar, Aggarwal Sameer, Prakash Mahesh, Patel Sandeep, Arora Chirag, Dhillon Mandeep Singh
Department of Orthopaedics, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
Department of Radiodiagnosis, PGIMER, Chandigarh, India.
Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2022 Dec;48(6):4559-4567. doi: 10.1007/s00068-021-01761-6. Epub 2021 Jul 31.
Three part and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus offer challenges in reduction and plate fixation, with considerable debate about use of Deltoid splitting (DS) and Delto-pectoral (DP) approaches, especially when they involving the greater tuberosity. We prospectively compared the results using DS approach and DP approach in these cases, with special focus on functional outcomes, complications, and ease of tuberosity reduction.
84 patients with three- and four-part proximal humerus fracture were alternately allocated the DP approach or DS approach for proximal humerus locking plate fixation. The outcome analysis was done by evaluating relative Constant score and ease of surgical reduction of greater tuberosity; radiological malunion was evaluated using Beredjiklian classification and complications were noted.
At mean follow-up of 23 months (19-48 months), the mean 'relative Constant score was 74.27 ± 8.19 in the DP group and 73.26 ± 8.02 in the DS group and the difference was statistically insignificant (p = 0.988). There was no significant difference with respect to shoulder ROM, abductor strength, radiological malunion or complications. However, the mean surgical time was significantly less (p value = 0.042) in DS group (65 ± 5 min) in comparison to DP group (92 ± 4.3 min); significantly less difficulties were documented by the surgeon in reducing the greater tuberosity in DS group(p value = 0.02).
Although surgical time was reduced and greater tuberosity reduction was easier in DS group, the other outcomes were similar; either surgical approach can be used based, and can be based on the experience and comfort level of the surgeon.
肱骨近端的三部分和四部分骨折在复位和钢板固定方面具有挑战性,关于采用三角肌劈开(DS)和三角肌胸大肌(DP)入路存在大量争论,尤其是当骨折涉及大结节时。我们前瞻性地比较了在这些病例中使用DS入路和DP入路的结果,特别关注功能结果、并发症以及大结节复位的难易程度。
84例肱骨近端三部分和四部分骨折患者被交替分配采用DP入路或DS入路进行肱骨近端锁定钢板固定。通过评估相对Constant评分和大结节手术复位的难易程度进行结果分析;使用Beredjiklian分类评估放射学上的畸形愈合并记录并发症。
平均随访23个月(19 - 48个月),DP组的平均“相对Constant评分”为74.27±8.19,DS组为73.26±8.02,差异无统计学意义(p = 0.988)。在肩关节活动度、外展肌力量、放射学畸形愈合或并发症方面无显著差异。然而,DS组的平均手术时间(65±5分钟)明显少于DP组(92±4.3分钟)(p值 = 0.042);外科医生记录在DS组中复位大结节的困难明显更少(p值 = 0.02)。
虽然DS组手术时间缩短且大结节复位更容易,但其他结果相似;两种手术入路均可使用,可依据外科医生的经验和舒适度来选择。