Plates vs. nails in humeral shaft fractures: Do plates lead to a better shoulder function?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder outcomes and function after humeral shaft fractures treated with plates and screws vs. antegrade nailing. METHODS: A group of 27 patients treated with plates and a group of 30 patients (previously published) who had undergone antegrade locked intramedullary nailing, all with acute humeral shaft fractures, were retrospectively compared. Final shoulder range of motion (ROM), full shoulder ROM recovery rate, functional outcomes, residual pain, complications, and elbow flexion-extension range were also analyzed. RESULTS: There were a total of 57 patients: 27 cases in the plate (P) group and 30 in the nail (N) group (average age, 41.9 years).There were 66.7% men in group N and 63.0% in group P. The average age was 38 years (interquartile range [IQR] 28) in group N and 37 years (IQR 55) in group P. There were no differences in follow-up between groups, which averaged 28 months (IQR 7) in group P and 30 months (IQR 2) in group N (P = .385). There was no difference in both groups in elbow flexion-extension. Group P had a full shoulder ROM (66.6% vs. 40.0%; P = .02) and excellent Rodríguez-Merchán scoring (66% vs. 40.0%; P < .01), which was significantly higher than in group N. In group P, the Constant score was 95 (IQR 9). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with plates in this comparative study led to a better ROM in the shoulder and fewer complications. Loss of shoulder motion may be expected after humeral shaft osteosynthesis. However, the functional scores and the healing index can be good and excellent with both techniques.