Literature DB >> 27605696

Humeral Shaft Fracture Fixation: Incidence Rates and Complications as Reported by American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Candidates.

Michael B Gottschalk1, William Carpenter2, Elise Hiza2, William Reisman2, James Roberson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite extensive research regarding patient outcomes after operative fixation of humeral shaft fractures by means of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or intramedullary nailing (IMN), no current consensus exists regarding the optimal surgical treatment. The objective of this study was to compare IMN and plate fixation (ORIF) of humeral shaft fractures by using the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II operative database to analyze incidence rates, changes in management trends over time, early complications, and factors affecting the management choice.
METHODS: The ABOS database is a collection of surgical cases that are self-reported by orthopaedic candidates approved for admission to the ABOS oral examination. The database was searched for records from 2004 to 2013 for humeral shaft surgical cases as indicated by Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 24515 (open reduction internal fixation) and 24516 (insertion of intramedullary nail) pertaining to humeral shaft fractures. The geographic region and fellowship training of the candidates; the year of surgery, diagnosis code, age, and sex of the patients; and the surgeon-reported complications were analyzed.
RESULTS: The search identified 3,430 surgically treated humeral shaft fractures that were reported to the ABOS database from 2004 to 2013. A significant decline in IMN use was seen from 2004 (42.9%) to 2013 (21.2%, p < 0.001). The IMN cohort had lower complication rates pertaining to both infections (1.5% compared with 3.0% for ORIF, p = 0.007) and nerve palsies (3.1% compared with 7.8%, p < 0.001). No significant difference was seen in the rate of nonunion (1.3% for IMN compared with 1.6% for ORIF, p = 0.63), although follow-up may be too short to demonstrate a difference. The IMN cohort did have significantly higher mortality (4.9% compared with 0.7% for ORIF, p < 0.001). Subset analysis demonstrated that the IMN cohort had significantly more pathologic fractures (26.8% compared with 1.5% of the fractures treated with ORIF, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall incidence of fixation of humeral shaft fractures was unchanged from 2004 to 2013, there was a significant shift from IMN to ORIF using plate fixation during this time period. Possible reasons for this shift in treatment to ORIF include the potential impact of recent publications highlighting complications of IMN and increased surgeon attention to cost containment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Copyright © 2016 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27605696     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.15.01049

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  15 in total

1.  Osteomyelitis Risk Factors Related to Combat Trauma Open Upper Extremity Fractures: A Case-Control Analysis.

Authors:  Tyler E Warkentien; Louis R Lewandowski; Benjamin K Potter; Joseph L Petfield; Daniel J Stinner; Margot Krauss; Clinton K Murray; David R Tribble
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-12       Impact factor: 2.512

2.  Humeral shaft fractures: national trends in management.

Authors:  Bradley S Schoch; Eric M Padegimas; Mitchell Maltenfort; James Krieg; Surena Namdari
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2017-05-08

3.  Incidence and Characteristics of Humeral Shaft Fractures After Subpectoral Biceps Tenodesis.

Authors:  Archie L Overmann; Donald F Colantonio; Benjamin M Wheatley; William R Volk; Kelly G Kilcoyne; Jonathan F Dickens
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2019-03-28

4.  Salvage of a recalcitrant humeral shaft septic nonunion using a linked nail-plate fixation construct with intercalary allograft.

Authors:  Sandip P Tarpada; Abraham M Goch; Jeremy Loloi; Milan K Sen
Journal:  Trauma Case Rep       Date:  2021-02-10

5.  A Comparative Study on Internal Fixation Using Long Proximal Intramedullary Nail for the Treatment of Humeral Shaft Fracture according to Fracture Types.

Authors:  Chang-Hyuk Choi; Chung-Mu Jun; Jun-Young Kim
Journal:  Clin Shoulder Elb       Date:  2019-06-01

6.  Comparison of direct surgical cost for humeral shaft fracture fixation: open reduction internal fixation versus intramedullary nailing.

Authors:  Andrew R Stephens; Angela P Presson; Chong Zhang; Brian Orleans; Mike Martin; Andrew R Tyser; Nikolas H Kazmers
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2021-04-30

Review 7.  Open plate fixation versus nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomised clinical trials and observational studies.

Authors:  Frank Joseph Paulus Beeres; Nicole van Veelen; Roderick Marijn Houwert; Björn Christian Link; Marilyn Heng; Matthias Knobe; Rolf Hendrik Herman Groenwold; Reto Babst; Bryan Joost Marinus van de Wall
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2021-07-05       Impact factor: 2.374

8.  Study of Radial Nerve Injury Caused By Gunshot Wounds and Explosive Injuries among Iraqi Soldiers.

Authors:  Reza Akhavan-Sigari; Dorothee Mielke; Afshin Farhadi; Veit Rohde
Journal:  Open Access Maced J Med Sci       Date:  2018-09-21

9.  Biomechanical comparison of humeral nails with different distal locking mechanisms: Insafelock nails versus conventional locking nails.

Authors:  Tunay Erden; Mehmet Kapicioglu; Abdullah Demirtas; Kerem Bilsel; Fuat Akpinar; Hacer Kuduz
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 1.511

10.  What should be the timing of surgical treatment of humeral shaft fractures?

Authors:  Şeyhmus Yiğit
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.