• T Mulier, D Seligson, W Sioen, J van den Bergh, and P Reynaert.
• Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Louisville, KY, USA.
• Acta Orthop Belg. 1997 Sep 1; 63 (3): 170-7.

AbstractThe results of the operative treatment of 27 humeral shaft fractures treated at the University of Louisville during a 2-year period were reviewed. The aim of this study was to analyze 1) the indications and results of surgical treatment, 2) the indications for nailing versus plating, and 3) the failures and their treatment (especially surgical nonunions). Indications for surgery were polytrauma patients (including open fractures, associated neurovascular injuries, associated ipsilateral forearm injuries) and isolated unstable fractures in which closed reduction failed. Plate and screw osteosynthesis was used in patients with proximal and distal fractures, in the presence of neurovascular injuries, progressive radial nerve palsy and failure of closed reduction due to interposition of soft tissue. Intramedullary antegrade nailing was preferentially used in polytrauma patients. Seven patients (25%) needed further surgery because of nonunion. The frequency was higher after plating (30%) than after nailing (20%), it was more common in comminuted fractures, middle third fractures and after insufficient distal locking. Exchange nailing resulted in union in 5 of the 7 cases. Although excellent results with low complication rates are reported in the recent literature following plate and screw osteosynthesis or locked intramedullary nailing, we found that operative treatment of difficult humeral shaft fractures is still fraught with a high complication rate.

40 keywords...

hide…