Literature DB >> 27984453

Management of Closed Diaphyseal Humerus Fractures in Patients With Injury Severity Score ≥17.

Cassandra Dielwart1, Luke Harmer, Jeremy Thompson, Rachel B Seymour, Madhav A Karunakar.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The management of closed diaphyseal humerus fractures in the polytrauma patient varies widely. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of operative and nonoperative management in this patient population.
DESIGN: Single-center, retrospective cohort analysis.
SETTING: Urban, Level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS: Seventy-one patients with closed diaphyseal humerus fractures, and Injury Severity Score (ISS) of ≥17, treated between 2006 and 2011 were identified. INTERVENTION: Patients were treated operatively versus nonoperatively with a functional brace by surgeon preference. MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome was union. Secondary outcomes included time to union, time to release to weightbearing, and complications other than nonunion.
RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between age, Injury Severity Score, or fracture type between the 2 cohorts. There was a statistically higher incidence of associated orthopaedic injury, and more specifically, lower extremity injury in the group treated with operative intervention. There was no difference in union rates (95% operative, 94% nonoperative), time to union (17 weeks operative, 15 weeks nonoperative), or complication rates between the 2 groups. Time to release to weightbearing was 3 weeks shorter in the operative group (9.3 weeks operative, 12.8 weeks nonoperative).
CONCLUSIONS: Polytrauma patients with closed diaphyseal humerus fractures can be treated successfully with equivalent union rates, time to union, and complication rates when selected for conservative management techniques. The decision to undertake operative management of closed diaphyseal humerus fractures in the polytraumatized patient is multifaceted and should consider patient expectations, demographics, injury profile, and ambulatory status. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27984453     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000768

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  4 in total

1.  Variation in management of humeral and clavicular shaft fractures amongst fellowship trained orthopedic traumatologists.

Authors:  Behnam Sharareh; Christopher Perkins
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 2.  Complications in humeral shaft fractures - non-union, iatrogenic radial nerve palsy, and postoperative infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Maria Anna Smolle; Sandra Bösmüller; Paul Puchwein; Martin Ornig; Andreas Leithner; Franz-Josef Seibert
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-01-11

3.  Functional and clinical outcome after operative versus nonoperative treatment of a humeral shaft fracture (HUMMER): results of a multicenter prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Dennis Den Hartog; Saskia H Van Bergen; Kiran C Mahabier; Michael H J Verhofstad; Esther M M Van Lieshout
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-02-09       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Radial nerve palsy associated with closed humeral shaft fractures: a systematic review of 1758 patients.

Authors:  Laurent A M Hendrickx; Nick F J Hilgersom; Hassanin Alkaduhimi; Job N Doornberg; Michel P J van den Bekerom
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-04-13       Impact factor: 3.067

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.