Department of Plastics Surgery, Chelsea Westminster Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Liverpool University Foundation Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024 May;33(5):1028-1033. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2023.09.019. Epub 2023 Oct 21.
Functional humeral bracing of midshaft humeral fractures has been widely accepted as a gold standard for nonoperative treatment. Despite reported high union rates, there is no proven superiority of any orthosis. Here we aim to compare the outcomes after the use of custom-made thermoplastic vs. commercial humeral brace with regard to time to union, nonunion rates, types of nonunion, and conversion to surgery.
Patients with humeral fractures treated between 2018 and 2021 were identified retrospectively by electronic records. Only diaphyseal humerus fractures (AO 12) were included in the study. Proximal (AO 11) or distal (AO 13) fractures, open fractures, pathologic fractures, bilateral fractures, multiple fractures, and patients lost to follow-up were excluded. Patients attending one center received a custom-made thermoplastic splint, whereas those at the other center had an off-the-shelf humeral brace applied. Radiologic union was defined as healing of at least 3 of 4 cortices determined from follow-up radiographs. Data calculations were performed using the χ test.
A total of 53 patients treated with a thermoplastic brace and 43 with a commercial brace were identified. A total of 52 men were included, and the cohort's mean age was 60.1 years (standard deviation: 16.1 years). Both groups had similar gender and age distributions. More patients achieved union with a thermoplastic brace (79.2%) than those with a commercial brace (76.7%), which was statistically significant (χ, P = .04). Although time to union was similar both clinically and radiologically, patients with a commercial brace converted to surgical treatment more frequently (11 vs. 14 cases).
Thermoplastic custom-made braces provide better fracture stability, allowing for statistically significantly higher rates of fracture union during a similar treatment period to commercially available splints. Patients wearing a commercial splint were significantly more likely to develop hypertrophic nonunion requiring surgery.
功能肱骨支架治疗肱骨中段骨折已被广泛认为是非手术治疗的金标准。尽管报道的愈合率较高,但任何支具都没有被证明具有优势。在这里,我们旨在比较使用定制热塑型与商业肱骨干支架治疗后的结果,包括愈合时间、不愈合率、不愈合类型以及转为手术的情况。
通过电子病历回顾性地确定 2018 年至 2021 年间治疗的肱骨骨折患者。本研究仅纳入骨干(AO 12)肱骨骨折。排除近端(AO 11)或远端(AO 13)骨折、开放性骨折、病理性骨折、双侧骨折、多发性骨折以及失访患者。在一个中心就诊的患者接受定制热塑夹板,而在另一个中心就诊的患者则使用现成的肱骨干支架。放射学愈合定义为根据随访 X 线片确定至少 4 个皮质中的 3 个愈合。使用 χ 检验进行数据计算。
共确定了 53 例接受热塑夹板治疗和 43 例接受商业夹板治疗的患者。共纳入 52 名男性,队列的平均年龄为 60.1 岁(标准差:16.1 岁)。两组的性别和年龄分布相似。使用热塑夹板的患者中有更多的患者达到愈合(79.2%),而使用商业夹板的患者中有更多的患者未达到愈合(76.7%),这具有统计学意义(χ,P =.04)。尽管临床和放射学上的愈合时间相似,但使用商业夹板的患者更频繁地转为手术治疗(11 例与 14 例)。
定制热塑夹板提供更好的骨折稳定性,在相似的治疗期间,骨折愈合率明显更高,而市售夹板则可获得相似的治疗效果。佩戴商业夹板的患者更有可能发生需要手术治疗的肥厚性不愈合。