Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2017 Dec;9(4):506-513.
doi: 10.4055/cios.2017.9.4.506. Epub 2017 Nov 10.

Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis Using a Screw Compression Method for Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures

Sang-Hun Ko  1 , Jae-Ryong Cha  1 , Chae Chil Lee  1 , Yong Tae Joo  1 , Kyeong Su Eom  1
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Minimally Invasive Plate Osteosynthesis Using a Screw Compression Method for Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fractures

Sang-Hun Ko et al. Clin Orthop Surg. 2017 Dec.

Abstract

Background: This study aims to compare the surgical outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) using a screw compression method in simple humeral shaft fractures.

Methods: This retrospective study was performed with 50 patients who had surgical interventions for the treatment of simple humeral shaft fractures and had follow-ups of at least 12 months in Ulsan University Hospital between August 2008 and June 2015. Group 1 included 23 patients treated with ORIF and group 2 included 27 patients treated with the MIPO technique using a locking screw plate. The time to clinical/radiographic union, the joint range of motion (ROM), and function were evaluated.

Results: The average time to clinical/radiographic bone union was shorter in group 2 (12.0 ± 3.7 weeks/14.8 ± 2.0 weeks in group 1 and 9.4 ± 1.3 weeks/12.0 ± 3.3 weeks in group 2; p = 0.022/p = 0.034). Shoulder and elbow joint function evaluated by joint ROM and visual analogue scale (VAS), Korean Shoulder Elbow Society (KSS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) scores was excellent in both groups. On the average shoulder ROM at 12 months after the operation, group 1 had forward elevation of 160°, external rotation of 30° in adduction and lumbar vertebra 10 level in internal rotation and group 2 had forward elevation of 170°, external rotation of 35° in adduction and lumbar vertebra 9 level in internal rotation. The mean VAS, KSS, ASES, and UCLA scores were 2.8, 87.0 ± 0.9, 89.4 ± 0.9, and 31.0 ± 1.4, respectively, in group 1 and 1.7, 89.1 ± 2.7, 91.0 ± 1.6, and 32.4 ± 3.2, respectively, in group 2. There were statistically significant intergroup differences in VAS score (p = 0.011). There were significantly less postoperative infections in group 2 (three cases, 10.7% in group 1 and 0 case in group 2; p = 0.041) although all of them were superficial infections and well-treated by an average 4-week course of antibiotics (range, 2 to 6 weeks).

Conclusions: MIPO using a screw compression method in simple humeral shaft fractures demonstrated superior efficacy to ORIF in terms of the time to clinical/radiographic union, pain score, and postoperative infection rate.

Keywords: Complication; Fracture fixation; Humeral fractures; Screw compression method; Union period.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis using a screw compression method. (A) A proper bone alignment is achieved using two locking screws. (B) Compressive force is obtained at the fracture site using two compression screws. (C) Additional locking screws are inserted. (D) Compression screws are replaced with locking screws.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2. Preoperative radiographs of a 33-year-old male showing a transverse fracture in the middle portion of the humeral shaft. (A) Anteroposterior view. (B) Lateral view.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3. Simple radiographs showing satisfactory results in the immediate postoperative period. (A) Anteroposterior view. (B) Lateral view.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4. Simple radiographs showing radiologic union 5 months postoperatively. (A) Anteroposterior view. (B) Lateral view.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Volgas DA, Stannard JP, Alonso JE. Nonunions of the humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;(419):46–50. - PubMed
    1. Fears RL, Gleis GE, Seligson D. Diagnosis and treatment of complications: fractures of the diaphyseal humerus. In: Browner BD, Jupiter JB, Levine AM, Trafton PG, editors. Skeletal trauma: fractures, dislocations, ligamentous injuries. Toronto: WB Saunders; 1998. pp. 567–578.
    1. Gregory PR. Fractures of the humeral shaft. In: Rockwood CA, Green DP, Heckman JD, Bucholz RW, editors. Rockwood and Green's fractures in adults. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002. pp. 973–976.
    1. Schemitsch EH, Bhandari M. Fractures of the diaphyseal humerus. In: Browner BD, Jupiter JB, Levine AM, Trafton PG, editors. Skeletal trauma: basic science, management, and reconstruction. Toronto: WB Saunders; 2003. pp. 1481–1511.
    1. McKee MD. Fractures of the shaft of the humerus. In: Bucholz RW, Heckman JD, Court-Brown C, Koval KJ, Tornetta P, Wirth MA, editors. Rockwood and Green's fractures in adults. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006. pp. 1117–1159.

Publication types

MeSH terms