Advertisement!
Author Information Pack
Editorial Board
Submit article
Special Issue
Editor's selection process
Join as Reviewer/Editor
List of Reviewer
Indexing Information
Most popular articles
Purchase Single Articles
Archive
Free Online Access
Current Issue
Recommend this journal to your library
Advertiser
Accepted Articles
Search Articles
Email Alerts
FAQ
Contact Us
Journal of Orthopedic Education

Volume  6, Issue 3,  September–December 2020, Pages 65-71
 

Original Article

Comparative Study between Anterior Bridge Plating and Posterior Plating for Fracture Shaft Humerus

Pradeep Choudhari1, Neeraj Jain2, Yogesh Patel3

1Professor and Unit Head, 2Assistant Professor, 3Yogesh Patel, PG Resident, Department of Orthopedics & Traumatology, Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical College & Post Graduate Institute Indore, 452003, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Choose an option to locate / access this Article:
90 days Access
Check if you have access through your login credentials.        PDF      |
|

Open Access: View PDF

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21088/joe.2454.7956.6220.8

Abstract

Introduction: Fractures of the humeral shaft are common, accounting for approximately 3% of all orthopaedic injuries. With improved and newer implants design and surgical techniques, surgical management of humeral shaft fractures has increasingly become accepted. The purpose of this study is to compare the functional and clinical outcomes of conventional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) by posterior plating with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) done by anterior approach in patients with fractures in humeral shaft. Patients and Methods: In the current prospective-retrospective study, 30 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated using ORIF (15 patients) or MIPO (15 patients) in our institute & followed up for 12 months. Comparison made between surgical duration, mean blood loss, time of union and complications in these two groups. Also, Mayo Elbow performance indexes (MEPI) and simple shoulder test (SST) questionnaire were used to compare the functional outcomes between the two groups. Results: In our study, for MIPO group, the mean blood loss was 118.67 ± 34.98 ml, while in the ORIF group it was 357.33 ± 51.61 ml. For MIPO group, the mean duration of surgery was 79.33 ± 10.15 min, while in the ORIF group it was 111.00 ± 13.91 min. The mean union time in MIPO was 12.73 ± 1.75 weeks, while in ORIF group it was 15.87 ± 1.88 weeks. The difference was found to be statistically significant (p<0.05), showing a higher mean duration of surgery in the ORIF with posterior plating group. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Index at the end of 12 month follow up for the MIPO group was 94.67 ± 7.19, while in the ORIF group was 92.33 ± 6.51. The difference was found to be statistically not significant (p>0.05). The mean points for the SST (max 12) for MIPO group and ORIF group were 11.73 ± 0.46 and 11.73 ± 0.59. Conclusions: The MIPO technique provides early union time, to some extent fewer complication rate than open plating and similar functional and clinical outcomes, the authors recommend to use the MIPO technique in treating the humeral shaft fracture.

Keywords: Humeral Shaft; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Internal Fracture Fixation


Corresponding Author : Pradeep Choudhari