Cargando…

Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach

BACKGROUND: Debate exists over the optimal approach for addressing fractures of the proximal humerus. The purpose of this study was to objectively quantify the surface area of the humerus exposed using the deltopectoral (DP) and anterolateral acromial (ALA) approaches and to compare visualized and p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Harmer, Luke S., Crickard, Colin V., Phelps, Kevin D., McKnight, R. Randall, Sample, Katherine M., Andrews, Erica B., Hamid, Nady, Hsu, Joseph R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6132305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30211395
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-18-00017
_version_ 1783354290976325632
author Harmer, Luke S.
Crickard, Colin V.
Phelps, Kevin D.
McKnight, R. Randall
Sample, Katherine M.
Andrews, Erica B.
Hamid, Nady
Hsu, Joseph R.
author_facet Harmer, Luke S.
Crickard, Colin V.
Phelps, Kevin D.
McKnight, R. Randall
Sample, Katherine M.
Andrews, Erica B.
Hamid, Nady
Hsu, Joseph R.
author_sort Harmer, Luke S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Debate exists over the optimal approach for addressing fractures of the proximal humerus. The purpose of this study was to objectively quantify the surface area of the humerus exposed using the deltopectoral (DP) and anterolateral acromial (ALA) approaches and to compare visualized and palpable anatomic landmarks. METHODS: Ten arms on five fresh-frozen torsos underwent the DP and ALA approaches. The arms were positioned to simulate a supine patient and held in a fixed position. Visual and/or palpable access to relevant surgical landmarks and the myotendinous junctions were recorded. The myotendinous junctions were used as a rough approximation of consistent proximal exposure of a clinically retracted tuberosity. Landmarks were grouped into quadrants based on the location. Calibrated digital photographs of each approach were analyzed to calculate the surface area and the length of the exposed bone. RESULTS: The DP and ALA approaches exposed 22.9 ± 6.3 cm(2) and 16.3 ± 6.4 cm(2), respectively (P = 0.03). The DP and ALA approaches provided equivalent visual and palpable access to all landmarks in the superior and inferior quadrants. The ALA allowed improved visual (80% versus 70%) and palpable (100% versus 70%) access to the myotendinous junction of the infraspinatus in the posterior quadrant. The DP approach allowed better access to anterior quadrant structures, including improved ability to visualize the myotendinous junction of the subscapularis (100% versus zero), the subscapularis insertion (100% versus 80%), and the medial anatomic neck (100% versus 20%). Palpable access to the myotendinous junction of the subscapularis (100% versus 70%) and medial anatomic neck (100% versus 60%) was also improved with the DP. CONCLUSIONS: In a cadaver model with fixed arm position, the DP provides increased exposure to the proximal humerus and more reliable access to anterior surgical landmarks, whereas the ALA allows improved access to the most posterior aspect of the shoulder.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6132305
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Wolters Kluwer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61323052018-09-12 Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach Harmer, Luke S. Crickard, Colin V. Phelps, Kevin D. McKnight, R. Randall Sample, Katherine M. Andrews, Erica B. Hamid, Nady Hsu, Joseph R. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev Research Article BACKGROUND: Debate exists over the optimal approach for addressing fractures of the proximal humerus. The purpose of this study was to objectively quantify the surface area of the humerus exposed using the deltopectoral (DP) and anterolateral acromial (ALA) approaches and to compare visualized and palpable anatomic landmarks. METHODS: Ten arms on five fresh-frozen torsos underwent the DP and ALA approaches. The arms were positioned to simulate a supine patient and held in a fixed position. Visual and/or palpable access to relevant surgical landmarks and the myotendinous junctions were recorded. The myotendinous junctions were used as a rough approximation of consistent proximal exposure of a clinically retracted tuberosity. Landmarks were grouped into quadrants based on the location. Calibrated digital photographs of each approach were analyzed to calculate the surface area and the length of the exposed bone. RESULTS: The DP and ALA approaches exposed 22.9 ± 6.3 cm(2) and 16.3 ± 6.4 cm(2), respectively (P = 0.03). The DP and ALA approaches provided equivalent visual and palpable access to all landmarks in the superior and inferior quadrants. The ALA allowed improved visual (80% versus 70%) and palpable (100% versus 70%) access to the myotendinous junction of the infraspinatus in the posterior quadrant. The DP approach allowed better access to anterior quadrant structures, including improved ability to visualize the myotendinous junction of the subscapularis (100% versus zero), the subscapularis insertion (100% versus 80%), and the medial anatomic neck (100% versus 20%). Palpable access to the myotendinous junction of the subscapularis (100% versus 70%) and medial anatomic neck (100% versus 60%) was also improved with the DP. CONCLUSIONS: In a cadaver model with fixed arm position, the DP provides increased exposure to the proximal humerus and more reliable access to anterior surgical landmarks, whereas the ALA allows improved access to the most posterior aspect of the shoulder. Wolters Kluwer 2018-06-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6132305/ /pubmed/30211395 http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-18-00017 Text en Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Research Article
Harmer, Luke S.
Crickard, Colin V.
Phelps, Kevin D.
McKnight, R. Randall
Sample, Katherine M.
Andrews, Erica B.
Hamid, Nady
Hsu, Joseph R.
Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title_full Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title_fullStr Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title_full_unstemmed Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title_short Surgical Approaches to the Proximal Humerus: A Quantitative Comparison of the Deltopectoral Approach and the Anterolateral Acromial Approach
title_sort surgical approaches to the proximal humerus: a quantitative comparison of the deltopectoral approach and the anterolateral acromial approach
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6132305/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30211395
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-18-00017
work_keys_str_mv AT harmerlukes surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT crickardcolinv surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT phelpskevind surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT mcknightrrandall surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT samplekatherinem surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT andrewsericab surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT hamidnady surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach
AT hsujosephr surgicalapproachestotheproximalhumerusaquantitativecomparisonofthedeltopectoralapproachandtheanterolateralacromialapproach