Fabrizio Bienati1, Alessandro Isola2, Sebastiano Ortu3, Luca Bonini2, Rossella Sirianni2, Antonio Capone4, Mario Manca2. 1. S.C. Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Ospedale San Michele, ARNAS G. Brotzu, Cagliari, Italy. 2. Dipartimento di Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Presidio Ospedaliero "Versilia", Lido di Camaiore, Italy. 3. Clinica Ortopedica Universitaria, Università degli studi di Sassari, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria di Sassari, Sassari, Italy. 4. Clinica Ortopedica Universitaria, Università degli studi di Cagliari, Ospedale Policlinico di Monserrato, Cagliari, Italy.
Abstract
Background: Fractures of the distal humerus are relatively rare and can be a source of disabling outcomes especially if not properly treated. Therefore, the objective of the treatment must be to obtain a stable synthesis that allows early mobilization, avoiding complications such as muscular hypotonotrophy, joint rigidity or delays in consolidation that may be due to prolonged immobilization of this joint. Although ORIF treatment of these fractures may intuitively appear to be the gold standard, there is still no consensus in the literature on which type of treatment is most suitable. Patients and method: We report in this retrospective case series analysis our experience on 31 elder patients (more than 65 years old), affected by a supra-intercondyloid humerus fracture, treated using a minimal internal fixation with cannulated screws combined with the use of an external articulated elbow fixator. This methodology is less invasive but allows a stable synthesis and an early mobilization.Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed for each patient at 1, 2, 3 and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months the residual joint excursion was evaluated and the data were collected. In addition, at 6 months, each patient underwent three different functional capacity assessment questionnaires: MAYO Elbow Performance score, The Disability of the ARM, Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) and Oxford Elbow Score. Results: The healing rate was 100% with no cases of non-union, despite the old age of our patients. The average range of motions obtained at 6 months from the surgery was 111° in flexion-extension and 157° in pronation-supination for the patient with an extra-articular fracture, 88° in flexion-extension and 153° in pronation-supination for the patients with a partial articular fracture and 85° in flexion-extension and 149° in pronation-supination for the patients with a complete articular fracture. Our results in the recovery of an arc of motion in flexion-extension are slightly less performing than the results obtained with an ORIF treatment. Indeed, according to literature the mean postoperative flexion arc in an ORIF treatment of distal humerus fractures in adults is 110°.The functional results obtained were satisfactory, with an average score at 6 months from the surgery of 95/100 (Mayo score) for the patients with an extra-articular fracture, 83.3/100 for the patients with a partial articular fracture and 79/100 for the patients with a complete articular fracture. Conclusion: The results obtained, in terms of range of motions, function, pain and healing and complications rate lead us to affirm that, in selected patients, this technique can represent a valid treatment and therefore a valid option that could be considered.
Background: Fractures of the distal humerus are relatively rare and can be a source of disabling outcomes especially if not properly treated. Therefore, the objective of the treatment must be to obtain a stable synthesis that allows early mobilization, avoiding complications such as muscular hypotonotrophy, joint rigidity or delays in consolidation that may be due to prolonged immobilization of this joint. Although ORIF treatment of these fractures may intuitively appear to be the gold standard, there is still no consensus in the literature on which type of treatment is most suitable. Patients and method: We report in this retrospective case series analysis our experience on 31 elder patients (more than 65 years old), affected by a supra-intercondyloid humerus fracture, treated using a minimal internal fixation with cannulated screws combined with the use of an external articulated elbow fixator. This methodology is less invasive but allows a stable synthesis and an early mobilization.Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed for each patient at 1, 2, 3 and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months the residual joint excursion was evaluated and the data were collected. In addition, at 6 months, each patient underwent three different functional capacity assessment questionnaires: MAYO Elbow Performance score, The Disability of the ARM, Shoulder and Hand Score (QuickDASH) and Oxford Elbow Score. Results: The healing rate was 100% with no cases of non-union, despite the old age of our patients. The average range of motions obtained at 6 months from the surgery was 111° in flexion-extension and 157° in pronation-supination for the patient with an extra-articular fracture, 88° in flexion-extension and 153° in pronation-supination for the patients with a partial articular fracture and 85° in flexion-extension and 149° in pronation-supination for the patients with a complete articular fracture. Our results in the recovery of an arc of motion in flexion-extension are slightly less performing than the results obtained with an ORIF treatment. Indeed, according to literature the mean postoperative flexion arc in an ORIF treatment of distal humerus fractures in adults is 110°.The functional results obtained were satisfactory, with an average score at 6 months from the surgery of 95/100 (Mayo score) for the patients with an extra-articular fracture, 83.3/100 for the patients with a partial articular fracture and 79/100 for the patients with a complete articular fracture. Conclusion: The results obtained, in terms of range of motions, function, pain and healing and complications rate lead us to affirm that, in selected patients, this technique can represent a valid treatment and therefore a valid option that could be considered.
Authors: Yaiza Lopiz; Daniel Garríguez-Pérez; Carlos García-Fernández; Laura Del Baño; María Galán-Olleros; Fernando Marco Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2021-04-12 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Kim M Brouwer; Anneluuk L Lindenhovius; George S Dyer; David Zurakowski; Chaitanya S Mudgal; David Ring Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2012-04-18 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Ata Can Atalar; Mehmet Demirhan; Ahmet Salduz; Onder Kiliçoğlu; Aksel Seyahi Journal: Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc Date: 2009 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.511
Authors: C Michael Robinson; Richard M F Hill; Neal Jacobs; Graham Dall; Charles M Court-Brown Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Carl Bergdahl; Carl Ekholm; David Wennergren; Filip Nilsson; Michael Möller Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2016-04-12 Impact factor: 2.362