• C-W Oh, Y-S Byun, J-K Oh, J-J Kim, I-H Jeon, J-H Lee, and K-H Park.
• Kyungpook National University Hospital, Daegu, Republic of Korea. cwoh@knu.ac.kr
• Orthop Traumatol Sur. 2012 Feb 1; 98 (1): 54-60.

PurposeThis study compared clinical outcomes and complications in patients with humeral shaft fractures treated using two methods of fixation by plating.MethodsMinimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO, n=29) was prospectively performed from around the middle of the study period, while open reduction and plate osteosynthesis (ORPO, n=30) had been the original standard method. Locking compression plate was used in these two groups. Major characteristics of the two groups were similar in terms of fracture type, fracture location, age, associated injuries and numbers of open fractures.ResultsPrimary union was achieved in 28 of 29 in the MIPO and in 27 of 30 in the ORPO. Mean time to union was similar in the two groups. Mean operation time in the MIPO (110min) was shorter than in the ORPO (169min) (P<0.05). Bone grafting was performed in five patients of in the ORPO, but in no patient in the MIPO (P<0.0001). There was one case of deep infection in the ORPO. Functional outcome was satisfactory in both groups.ConclusionsMinimally invasive plate osteosynthesis may achieve comparable results with the open plate osteosynthesis method in simple as well as complex fractures of humeral shaft. Although MIPO potentially has the radiation hazard, it may reduce the perioperative complications with a shortened operation time.Level Of EvidenceLevel III. Case-control study.Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

23 keywords...

hide…