| Literature DB >> 31452616 |
Guilherme Grisi Mouraria1, Américo Zoppi1, Fernando Kenji Kikuta1, Lucas Moratelli2, Paulo Pedroso Silveira2, Maurício Etchebehere2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The main surgical approach in proximal humeral fractures is the deltopectoral approach. Many surgeons avoid the anterolateral approach, fearing its complications, especially axillary nerve injury. The objective of this study is to evaluate shoulder function and complications in patients with proximal humeral fractures treated using an anterolateral approach with direct observation of the axillary nerve.Entities:
Keywords: Complications; Humeral Fractures; Osteosynthesis fracture; Surgery
Year: 2019 PMID: 31452616 PMCID: PMC6699393 DOI: 10.1590/1413-785220192703218226
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Ortop Bras ISSN: 1413-7852 Impact factor: 0.513
Figure 1Antero lateral Skin Incision.
Figure 2Final plate position.
Figure 3Head-Shaft angle (A); Anteroposterior tilt(B); Plate Height (C1); Greater Tuberosity Reduction (C2).
Demographic characteristics of patients.
| Variable | Value |
|---|---|
| Age [Mean (± SD)] (years) | 53.6±16.9 |
| Consolidation time [mean (±SD)] (months) | 3.1±1.0 |
| Follow-up time [mean (± SD] (months) | 31.1±20.3 |
|
| |
| Male | 16 (45.7%) |
| Female | 19 (54.3%) |
|
| |
| II | 11 (31.4%) |
| III | 13 (37.2%) |
| IV | 11 (31.4%) |
|
| |
| Right | 15 (42.9%) |
| Left | 20 (57.1%) |
|
| |
| Right | 34 (97.1%) |
| Left | 1 (2.9%) |
Numerical variables (mean ± SD; median [min-max]).
| All cases | Neer classification | p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type II | Type III | Type IV | |||
| Head-Shaft angle (°) | 133,4 ± 10,1 | 134,6 ± 5,1 | 132,6 ± 9,4 | 133,2 ± 14,7 | 0,924 |
| Anterior/posterior ang (°) | -8,34 ± 11,23 | -6,91 ± 11,42 | -7,69 ± 12,73 | -10,55 ± 9,78 | 0,375 |
| Major tuberosity reduction (mm) | -0,93 ± 4,05 | NA | -0,59 ± 3,07 | -1,34 ± 5,11 | 0,664 |
| Plate height (mm) | -8,70 ± 5,19 | -9,91 ± 3,37 | -9,55 ± 6,38 | -8,70 ± 5,19 | 0,231 |
Kruskal-Wallis test;
ANOVA.
Categorical variables (frequency).
| All cases (n=35) | Neer classification | p-value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type II (n=11) | Type III (n=13) | Type IV (n=11) | |||
|
| 0.908 | ||||
| Varus (< 120°) | 5.7% (2/35) | 0% (0/11) | 7.7% (1/13) | 9.1% (1/11) | |
| Normal (120° to 140°) | 85.7% (30/35) | 90.9% (10/11) | 84.6% (11/13) | 81.8% (9/11) | |
| Valgus (> 140°) | 8.6% (3/35) | 9.1% (1/11) | 7.7% (1/13) | 9.1% (1/11) | |
|
| 0.628 | ||||
| Posterior (< −5°) | 34.3% (12/35) | 27.3% (3/11) | 30.8% (4/13) | 45.5% (5/11) | |
| Normal (-5° to +5°) | 62.9% (22/35) | 72.7% (8/11) | 61.5% (8/13) | 54.5% (6/11) | |
| Anterior (> +5°) | 2.9% (1/35) | 0% (0/11) | 7.7% (1/13) | 0% (0/11) | |
|
| 0.647 | ||||
| Below | 45.8% (11/24) | NA | 46.2% (6/13) | 45.5% (5/11) | |
| Same or above | 54.2% (13/24) | NA | 53.8% (7/13) | 54.5% (6/11) | |
|
| 0.406 | ||||
| Below | 91.4% (32/35) | 100% (11/11) | 84.6% (11/13) | 90.9% (10/11) | |
| Same or above | 8.6% (3/35) | 0% (0/11) | 15.4% (2/13) | 9.1% (1/11) | |
Multiple linear regression results.
| Dependent Variable | Predictor | Regression Coefficient - Not standardised (B) | Regression Coefficient - Standardised (Beta) |
| IC 95% (B) | Variance explained by the predictor (%) | R2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant Scores (operated shoulder) | Constant value | 78.6 | < 0.001 | 72.7 | a | 84.4 | 30.7 | 0.307 | |
| Neer Classification (IV/others) | -19.0 | -0.55 | 0.001 | -29.3 | a | -8.7 | |||
| DASH Score (operated shoulder) | Constant value | 7.0 | 0.024 | 1.0 | a | 12.9 | 17.9 | 0.179 | |
| Neer Classification (IV/others) | 13.6 | 0.42 | 0.013 | 3.1 | a | 24.09 | |||