Is Anterior Bridge Plating for Mid-Shaft Humeral Fractures a Suitable Option for Patients Predominantly Involved in Overhead Activities? A Functional Outcome Study in Athletes and Manual Laborers.
10.4055/cios.2016.8.4.358
- Author:
Abhishek S MAHAJAN
1
;
Young Gun KIM
;
Jae Hwa KIM
;
Prashanth D'SA
;
Azhar LAKHANI
;
Hyun Soo OK
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopedics & Joint Center, CHA Bundang Medical Center, Seongnam, Korea. drjkim@cha.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Humeral fractures;
Anterior bridge plating;
Minimally invasive surgery
- MeSH:
Arm;
Athletes*;
Bony Callus;
Elbow;
Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary;
Hand;
Humans;
Humeral Fractures*;
Humerus;
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures;
Occupations;
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)*;
Range of Motion, Articular;
Shoulder;
Trauma Centers
- From:Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery
2016;8(4):358-366
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: To assess the functional and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive anterior bridge plating (ABP) for mid-shaft humerus fractures in patients predominantly involved in overhead activities (athletes and manual laborers). METHODS: Forty-eight patients fulfilling inclusion criteria were treated with ABP at a level-I trauma center using a 4.5-mm dynamic/locking compression plate and followed for a period of 1 year. Functional outcome was assessed using the Constant, Mayo elbow, and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores. Range of motion (ROM), subjective strength, and radiographic union were assessed. A general satisfaction questionnaire was also administered. RESULTS: Most patients achieved excellent functional and radiological outcomes. ROM and strength of the shoulder girdle exhibited clinically nonsignificant loss as compared to the opposite side. The mean time for return to the original activities was 64 days (range, 36 to 182 days) and the mean time for confirmed radiographic union was 45 days (range, 34 to 180 days). The mean Constant, Mayo elbow, DASH scores were 95.73 ± 5.76 (range, 79 to 100), 95.94 ± 6.74 (range, 85 to 100), and 1.56 ± 3.15 (range, 0.0 to 14.0), respectively. The majority of patients (43 patients, 89.6%) who fell in the excellent or very good category according to our questionnaire were extremely satisfied. There were 2 cases (4.17%) of nonunion and 3 patients (6.25%) had to change/modify their original occupation. CONCLUSIONS: ABP is fundamentally different from traditional open posterior plating or conventional intramedullary nailing. It gives relative stability with union taking place by callus formation, and a longer plate on the tensile surface ensures that the humerus can withstand greater amount of rotational and bending stresses. The minimally invasive nature causes minimal soft tissue damage and, if done correctly, causes no damage to the vital structures in proximity. ABP for mid-shaft humerus fractures in patients predominantly engaged in overhead activities is a safe and effective treatment modality yielding high rates of union, excellent functional recovery, minimal biological disruption, better cosmesis, and superior satisfaction rates.
