Comparison of Plate, Nail and External Fixation in the Management of Diaphyseal Fractures of the Humerus
Michele Bisaccia, Luigi Meccariello, Giuseppe Rinonapoli, Giuseppe Rollo, Marco Pellegrino, Andrea Schiavone, Cristina Ibáñez Vicente, Pellegrino Ferrara, Marco Filipponi, Auro Caraffa.
Introduction : Humeral shaft fractures are quite common in orthopedics and represent 1-3% of adult fractures. The surgical treatment is the a better choice in order to obtain a reduction and stable alignment and to prevent the complications. The goal of this study was to compare the three techniques (IMN, LCP and EF) in the treatment of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus in the adult patient. Materials and Methods: We examined 79 patients with diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. 32 were treated with plaque (LCP), 26 with intramedullary nail (IMN) and 21 with eternal fixer (FE) The clinical and radiographic follow-up was done at 1.3, 6 and 12 months. As rating scales we used the ASES and SF-36. We recorded all the complications. Results: The median follow-up was 11.5 months (9-16). The operative time was significantly smaller in the case of FE (47 ‘) with a statistically significant difference compared with other techniques. Even the blood loss was lower in the case of FE (60ml), compared to nails (160ml) and LCP (330ml) p
Humeral Shaft fractures; Plate; External Fixation; Intramedullary nailing; Outcomes; bleeding; complications.
American Journal of Diagnostic Imaging
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE NOW