Helical plating yields better outcomes than intramedullary nailing or long straight lateral plating for humeral shaft fractures extending to the proximal humerus.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Xiaolong Wang, Xin Zhang, Yuxuan Jiang, Haifeng Qiao, Xiaomin Kang, Yangjun Zhu, Yan Zhang, Dongxu Feng
{"title":"Helical plating yields better outcomes than intramedullary nailing or long straight lateral plating for humeral shaft fractures extending to the proximal humerus.","authors":"Xiaolong Wang, Xin Zhang, Yuxuan Jiang, Haifeng Qiao, Xiaomin Kang, Yangjun Zhu, Yan Zhang, Dongxu Feng","doi":"10.1186/s13018-025-06283-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study was performed to compare the operative clinical outcomes of helical plating, intramedullary nailing (IMN), and long straight lateral plating in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus, as well as to identify the optimal fixation strategy for managing such injuries.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In total, 81 patients with humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus were divided into three groups based on treatment strategy: helical plating (Group A, n = 16), IMN (Group B, n = 12), and long straight lateral plating (Group C, n = 53). Preoperative demographic data and imaging were collected from the medical records. Operative time, blood transfusion, bone reduction quality, bone healing rate, and incidence of complications were recorded. Clinical evaluation included the Constant-Murley score for shoulder function, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire for upper limb function, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and assessments of shoulder stiffness or instability and patient satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared with Groups A and C, patients in Group B had a longer operative time and lower blood transfusion requirements. More than 80% of patients in each group achieved bone reduction quality rated as \"better than good.\" There were no significant differences among the three groups in operative time, blood transfusion, or shaft angulation. Bone healing rates were 100%, 91.7%, and 94.3% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Mean shoulder flexion was 155.0°, 130.0°, and 150.0°, respectively. Functional outcomes, including the Constant-Murley score, DASH score, VAS score, and patient satisfaction, were significantly better in Group A than in Groups B and C. No complications occurred in Group A. One patient in Group B developed nonunion. In Group C, complications were observed in five patients (9.4%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In the treatment of humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus, helical plating was associated with a higher bone union rate, better functional outcomes, and a lower postoperative complication rate compared with IMN or long straight lateral locking plates. Outcomes after nailing and long straight lateral plating were similar.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":"20 1","pages":"858"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12482586/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-025-06283-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study was performed to compare the operative clinical outcomes of helical plating, intramedullary nailing (IMN), and long straight lateral plating in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus, as well as to identify the optimal fixation strategy for managing such injuries.

Methods: In total, 81 patients with humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus were divided into three groups based on treatment strategy: helical plating (Group A, n = 16), IMN (Group B, n = 12), and long straight lateral plating (Group C, n = 53). Preoperative demographic data and imaging were collected from the medical records. Operative time, blood transfusion, bone reduction quality, bone healing rate, and incidence of complications were recorded. Clinical evaluation included the Constant-Murley score for shoulder function, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire for upper limb function, the visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, and assessments of shoulder stiffness or instability and patient satisfaction.

Results: Compared with Groups A and C, patients in Group B had a longer operative time and lower blood transfusion requirements. More than 80% of patients in each group achieved bone reduction quality rated as "better than good." There were no significant differences among the three groups in operative time, blood transfusion, or shaft angulation. Bone healing rates were 100%, 91.7%, and 94.3% in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Mean shoulder flexion was 155.0°, 130.0°, and 150.0°, respectively. Functional outcomes, including the Constant-Murley score, DASH score, VAS score, and patient satisfaction, were significantly better in Group A than in Groups B and C. No complications occurred in Group A. One patient in Group B developed nonunion. In Group C, complications were observed in five patients (9.4%).

Conclusion: In the treatment of humeral shaft fractures extending into the proximal humerus, helical plating was associated with a higher bone union rate, better functional outcomes, and a lower postoperative complication rate compared with IMN or long straight lateral locking plates. Outcomes after nailing and long straight lateral plating were similar.

螺旋钢板比髓内钉或长直外侧钢板治疗肱骨骨干骨折延至肱骨近端效果更好。
背景:本研究旨在比较螺旋钢板、髓内钉(IMN)和长直外侧钢板治疗肱骨骨干骨折延伸至肱骨近端的手术临床效果,并确定治疗此类损伤的最佳固定策略。方法:81例肱骨干骨折延伸至肱骨近端,根据治疗策略分为3组:螺旋钢板(A组,n = 16)、内固定钢板(B组,n = 12)和长直外侧钢板(C组,n = 53)。术前人口统计资料和影像学资料收集自医疗记录。记录手术时间、输血量、骨复位质量、骨愈合率、并发症发生率。临床评估包括肩部功能的Constant-Murley评分,上肢功能的臂、肩和手残疾(DASH)问卷,疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS),以及肩部僵硬或不稳定的评估和患者满意度。结果:与A、C组比较,B组患者手术时间较长,输血需要量较低。两组中80%以上的患者达到了“好于好”的骨复位质量。三组在手术时间、输血量、轴角等方面无显著差异。A、B、C组骨愈合率分别为100%、91.7%、94.3%。平均肩关节屈曲度分别为155.0°、130.0°和150.0°。功能结果,包括Constant-Murley评分、DASH评分、VAS评分和患者满意度,A组明显优于B组和c组。A组无并发症发生,B组1例出现骨不连。C组出现并发症5例(9.4%)。结论:在肱骨骨干骨折延伸至肱骨近端治疗中,与内固定钢板或长直外侧锁定钢板相比,螺旋钢板具有更高的骨愈合率、更好的功能预后和更低的术后并发症发生率。髓内钉和长直外侧钢板后的结果相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
494
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues. Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications. JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信