Home|Journals|Articles by Year|Audio Abstracts
 

Original Article

Med Arch. 2017; 71(2): 97-102


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.




Abstract

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

Key words: Humeral Shaft fractures; Plate; External Fixation; Intramedullary nailing; Outcomes; bleeding; complications.






Full-text options


Share this Article


Online Article Submission
• ejmanager.com




ejPort - eJManager.com
Review(er)s Central
JournalList
About BiblioMed
License Information
Terms & Conditions
Privacy Policy
Contact Us

The articles in Bibliomed are open access articles licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.