Cargando…

Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures

Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of two different surgical approaches, the anterolateral and posterior approaches, for treating humeral shaft fractures. Materials and methods: Between January 2015 and May 2021, 51 patients with humeral shaft fractures were...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Çukurlu, Mustafa, Keçeli, Ozan, Ağır, İsmail
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37398729
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39755
_version_ 1785066660354326528
author Çukurlu, Mustafa
Keçeli, Ozan
Ağır, İsmail
author_facet Çukurlu, Mustafa
Keçeli, Ozan
Ağır, İsmail
author_sort Çukurlu, Mustafa
collection PubMed
description Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of two different surgical approaches, the anterolateral and posterior approaches, for treating humeral shaft fractures. Materials and methods: Between January 2015 and May 2021, 51 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with anterolateral and posterior approaches. Twenty-nine patients were operated with the posterior approach (group 1) and 22 with the anterolateral approach (group 2). Statistical analyses were performed between the two groups regarding age, gender distribution, fractured side, body mass index (BMI), type of trauma, Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification, and follow-up time. Complications such as operative time, amount of bleeding, incision length and implant fracture, radial nerve palsy, wound infection, and nonunion were compared between the two groups. Functional results of the elbow joint were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Results: The mean follow-up period was 49.10±21.15 months (12-75 months) in group 1 and 50.00±23.71 months (range: 15-70 months) in group 2. There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of age, gender distribution, fractured side, BMI, trauma type, AO/OTA classification, and follow-up time (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and incision length (p>0.05). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.24±20.03 (range: 70-100 points) in group 1 and 81.36±8.34 (range: 70-100 points) in group 2, and no significant difference was found (p>0.05). When evaluated in terms of complications, there was no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). While there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding elbow joint range of motion, the limitation was observed in more patients in group 1. Conclusion: Similar satisfactory treatment results were obtained in patients who underwent anterolateral and posterior approaches in treating humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, no difference was found between the two approaches regarding complication rates.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10311039
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103110392023-07-01 Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures Çukurlu, Mustafa Keçeli, Ozan Ağır, İsmail Cureus Orthopedics Aim: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes and complications of two different surgical approaches, the anterolateral and posterior approaches, for treating humeral shaft fractures. Materials and methods: Between January 2015 and May 2021, 51 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with anterolateral and posterior approaches. Twenty-nine patients were operated with the posterior approach (group 1) and 22 with the anterolateral approach (group 2). Statistical analyses were performed between the two groups regarding age, gender distribution, fractured side, body mass index (BMI), type of trauma, Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) classification, and follow-up time. Complications such as operative time, amount of bleeding, incision length and implant fracture, radial nerve palsy, wound infection, and nonunion were compared between the two groups. Functional results of the elbow joint were evaluated with the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Results: The mean follow-up period was 49.10±21.15 months (12-75 months) in group 1 and 50.00±23.71 months (range: 15-70 months) in group 2. There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of age, gender distribution, fractured side, BMI, trauma type, AO/OTA classification, and follow-up time (p>0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative bleeding, and incision length (p>0.05). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 77.24±20.03 (range: 70-100 points) in group 1 and 81.36±8.34 (range: 70-100 points) in group 2, and no significant difference was found (p>0.05). When evaluated in terms of complications, there was no significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). While there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding elbow joint range of motion, the limitation was observed in more patients in group 1. Conclusion: Similar satisfactory treatment results were obtained in patients who underwent anterolateral and posterior approaches in treating humeral shaft fractures. Furthermore, no difference was found between the two approaches regarding complication rates. Cureus 2023-05-30 /pmc/articles/PMC10311039/ /pubmed/37398729 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39755 Text en Copyright © 2023, Çukurlu et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Orthopedics
Çukurlu, Mustafa
Keçeli, Ozan
Ağır, İsmail
Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title_full Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title_fullStr Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title_short Comparison of Posterior and Anterolateral Surgical Approaches in Treating Adult Humeral Shaft Fractures
title_sort comparison of posterior and anterolateral surgical approaches in treating adult humeral shaft fractures
topic Orthopedics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10311039/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37398729
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.39755
work_keys_str_mv AT cukurlumustafa comparisonofposteriorandanterolateralsurgicalapproachesintreatingadulthumeralshaftfractures
AT keceliozan comparisonofposteriorandanterolateralsurgicalapproachesintreatingadulthumeralshaftfractures
AT agırismail comparisonofposteriorandanterolateralsurgicalapproachesintreatingadulthumeralshaftfractures