Cargando…

Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study

BACKGROUND: With the rapid aging of the population, the incidence of proximal humeral fracture (PHF) has increased. However, the optimal method for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) remains controversial. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with PHF who underwent loc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Ji-Qi, Lin, Chui-cong, Zhao, You-Ming, Jiang, Bing-Jie, Huang, Xiao-Jing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32593311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03417-9
_version_ 1783551491359899648
author Wang, Ji-Qi
Lin, Chui-cong
Zhao, You-Ming
Jiang, Bing-Jie
Huang, Xiao-Jing
author_facet Wang, Ji-Qi
Lin, Chui-cong
Zhao, You-Ming
Jiang, Bing-Jie
Huang, Xiao-Jing
author_sort Wang, Ji-Qi
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: With the rapid aging of the population, the incidence of proximal humeral fracture (PHF) has increased. However, the optimal method for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) remains controversial. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with PHF who underwent locking plate internal fixation at our institution from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach used: an expanded deltoid-split approach group (ORIF group) and minimally invasive deltoid-split approach group (minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis, [MIPPO] group). The groups were compared in terms of demographic and perioperative characteristics, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 115 cases of PHF were included in our study, of which 64 cases were treated using the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach and 51 using the extended deltoid-split approach. Fluoroscopy was performed significantly less frequently in the ORIF group and the surgical duration was shorter. However, the postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and duration of postoperative hospital stay were significantly higher compared to the MIPPO group. Moreover, secondary loss was significantly less extensive in the ORIF group compared to the MIPPO group, while there was no significant group difference in fracture healing time, Constant shoulder score, or complications at the last follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcomes associated with both the minimally invasive and extended deltoid-split approaches were satisfactory. The data presented here suggest that the extended deltoid-split approach was superior to the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach in terms of operational time, fluoroscopy, and secondary loss of reduction, while the minimally invasive approach was superior in terms of postoperative pain and hospital stay. Accordingly, neither procedure can be considered definitively superior; the optimal surgical procedure for PHF can only be determined after full consideration of the situation and requirements of the individual patient.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7321543
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73215432020-06-29 Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study Wang, Ji-Qi Lin, Chui-cong Zhao, You-Ming Jiang, Bing-Jie Huang, Xiao-Jing BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: With the rapid aging of the population, the incidence of proximal humeral fracture (PHF) has increased. However, the optimal method for open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) remains controversial. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with PHF who underwent locking plate internal fixation at our institution from January 2016 to December 2018. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach used: an expanded deltoid-split approach group (ORIF group) and minimally invasive deltoid-split approach group (minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis, [MIPPO] group). The groups were compared in terms of demographic and perioperative characteristics, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 115 cases of PHF were included in our study, of which 64 cases were treated using the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach and 51 using the extended deltoid-split approach. Fluoroscopy was performed significantly less frequently in the ORIF group and the surgical duration was shorter. However, the postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score and duration of postoperative hospital stay were significantly higher compared to the MIPPO group. Moreover, secondary loss was significantly less extensive in the ORIF group compared to the MIPPO group, while there was no significant group difference in fracture healing time, Constant shoulder score, or complications at the last follow-up visit. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical outcomes associated with both the minimally invasive and extended deltoid-split approaches were satisfactory. The data presented here suggest that the extended deltoid-split approach was superior to the minimally invasive deltoid-split approach in terms of operational time, fluoroscopy, and secondary loss of reduction, while the minimally invasive approach was superior in terms of postoperative pain and hospital stay. Accordingly, neither procedure can be considered definitively superior; the optimal surgical procedure for PHF can only be determined after full consideration of the situation and requirements of the individual patient. BioMed Central 2020-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7321543/ /pubmed/32593311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03417-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Wang, Ji-Qi
Lin, Chui-cong
Zhao, You-Ming
Jiang, Bing-Jie
Huang, Xiao-Jing
Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title_full Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title_fullStr Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title_short Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
title_sort comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321543/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32593311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03417-9
work_keys_str_mv AT wangjiqi comparisonbetweenminimallyinvasivedeltoidsplitandextendeddeltoidsplitapproachforproximalhumeralfracturesacasecontrolstudy
AT linchuicong comparisonbetweenminimallyinvasivedeltoidsplitandextendeddeltoidsplitapproachforproximalhumeralfracturesacasecontrolstudy
AT zhaoyouming comparisonbetweenminimallyinvasivedeltoidsplitandextendeddeltoidsplitapproachforproximalhumeralfracturesacasecontrolstudy
AT jiangbingjie comparisonbetweenminimallyinvasivedeltoidsplitandextendeddeltoidsplitapproachforproximalhumeralfracturesacasecontrolstudy
AT huangxiaojing comparisonbetweenminimallyinvasivedeltoidsplitandextendeddeltoidsplitapproachforproximalhumeralfracturesacasecontrolstudy