Comparison of Plate, Nail and External Fixation in the Management of Diaphyseal Fractures of the Humerus

INTRODUCTION: Humeral shaft fractures are quite common in orthopedics and represent 1-3% of adult fractures. The surgical treatment is the a better choice in order to obtain a reduction and stable alignment and to prevent the complications. The goal of this study was to compare the three techniques (IMN, LCP and EF) in the treatment of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus in the adult patient. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We examined 79 patients with diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. 32 were treated with plaque (LCP), 26 with intramedullary nail (IMN) and 21 with eternal fixer (FE) The clinical and radiographic follow-up was done at 1.3, 6 and 12 months. As rating scales we used the ASES and SF-36. We recorded all the complications. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 11.5 months (9-16). The operative time was significantly smaller in the case of FE (47 ‘) with a statistically significant difference compared with other techniques. Even the blood loss was lower in the case of FE (60ml), compared to nails (160ml) and LCP (330ml) p <0.05. We had no differences in the duration of hospitalization and the ASES SF-36 score. We had 2 cases of non-union in the LCP group, 1 case in the IMN group and no cases in the FE group. In IMN group we had one case of radial transient paralysis. We did not have any deep infection, in the FE group 8 patients we had superficial secretions from pins. CONCLUSION: From the results of our study, it is clear that the treatment of humeral shaft fractures guarantee overlapping results with the use of plates, of intramedullary nails, or with the external fixator. Consequently, the choice of which technique to use should be determined based on the experience of the operator and patient compliance.