• Injury · Aug 2017

    Comparative Study

    Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures.

    • Vidisha Sunil Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay Kulkarni, Govind Shivram Kulkarni, Vaibhav Goyal, and Milind Govind Kulkarni.
    • Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, Swasthiyog Pratishthan Fracture and Orthopaedic Hospital, Miraj 416410, India.
    • Injury. 2017 Aug 1; 48 Suppl 2: S8-S13.

    IntroductionThe three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published reports have a comparison of superiority of one procedure over the other. We evaluated the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of the three procedures.Materials And MethodsWe studied adult patients with humerus shaft fractures over a period of 2 years from May 2014 to May 2016 in a level 1 trauma center. Forty-four were treated with IMN, 34 treated with ORPO, and 34 with MIPO. The null hypothesis tested in this study is that there is no difference between IMN, ORPO, MIPO with respect to union time, surgical time, complication rate, non-union rate and functional outcome. Functional outcome was studied by comparing the UCLA shoulder and MEP scores in the three groups.Results112 patients were studied consisting of 83 males and 29 females with mean age of 39 years (range 18-70). IMN group showed early union with mean of 12.73 weeks compared to MIPO (14.45 weeks) and ORPO(13.58 weeks), (p<0.05). MIPO had no events of non-union, as compared to ORPO (5 non-unions) and IMN (10 non-unions), (p=0.04). The range of movement at the shoulder with the UCLA score was significantly better with a score of 32.26 in MIPO as compared to 27.54 in IMN and 28.82 in ORPO (p<0.05). The difference in MEPS score in the three groups was not significant (p=0.31). IMN required a mean of 117.95 minutes intraoperatively as compared to 131 and 150.58 mins in MIPO, ORPO respectively.ConclusionMIPO is overall better with respect to non-union, functional outcome and complications rate. The surgical time depends on the surgeons' skill and learning curve. Thus considering the advantages and risks involved in the various procedure and surgical acumen, each case should be individualized to have a good outcome. We advocate that MIPO can be safely used as an alternative in treating these fractures.© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…