Clinical study on dual plating for delayed unions and nonunions of distal 1/3 and diaphyseal-metaphyseal transition of humerus

Authors

  • Tae-Hyok Ri Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University
  • Hyung-Jun Jon Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University
  • Dong-Ju Kim Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University
  • In-Song Ri Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University
  • Gwang-Nam Kang Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University,
  • Sang-Hun Ri Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University
  • Jong-Pyong Hwang Pyongyang Medical College, KIM IL SUNG University

Keywords:

Dual plating, double plating, nonunion, delayed union, humerus, metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition

Abstract

Background: The best treatment for delayed union and non-union at distal 1/3 and metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition of humerus is not well established. We collected retrospective and prospective outcomes data for patients undergoing open reduction and internal fixation for delayed union and non-union of distal 1/3 and metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition of humerus with use of conventional mono-lateral or dual plating. Methods and Material: Over a 2-year period, 35 patients underwent open reduction and internal fixation of delayed union and non-union of distal 1/3 and metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition of humerus with use of conventional mono-lateral (control group, 19 cases) or dual plating (study group, 16 cases). In the present study patients were enrolled 3 months after operation on the basis of strict entry criteria and were evaluated 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. Outcome measures included incidence rate of complication, radiographic parameters, elbow range of motion, and Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI). Statistical analysis used: Results: Thirty five patients with delayed union or non-union of distal metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition of humerus were enrolled. The mean age at the time of enrolment was 42.9 years. There were 21 delayed unions and 14 cases of non-unions. Fifty seven percent (eight) of the fourteen non-unions were classified as hypertrophic type and forty three percent (six) were classified as atrophic type. Radiographic assessment showed that the dual plating system maintained good reduction and alignment at the follow-up periods. At the time of the twelve-month follow-up, incidence rate of complication, radiographic parameters, elbow range of motion, and Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) showed statistically better results in study group compared to those in control group. Conclusions: The dual plating system appears to provide effective fixation when used for the treatment of delayed union or non-union of distal 1/3 and metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition of humerus.

 

Keywords: Delayed union, dual plating, double plating, humerus, metaphyseal-diaphyseal transition, non-union

Cite this Article

Tae-Hyok Ri, Hyung-Jun Jon, Dong-Ju Kim, In-Song Ri, Gwang-Nam Kang, Sang-Hun Ri, Jong-Pyong Hwang. Clinical Study on Dual Plating for Delayed Unions and Nonunions of Distal 1/3 and Diaphyseal-Metaphyseal Transition of Humerus. Research & Reviews: Journal of Surgery. 2020; 9(1): 10–15p.

References

Sam Akhavan and John W. Shaffer. Fractures of the Humeral Shaft In: Bruce H. Ziran and Wade R. Smith (eds.). Fractures of the Upper Extremity. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York 2004:93,110,112

Anand J. Thakur. The elements of fracture fixation. 2nd ed. Elsevier, New York 2013:94

David Ring, Peter Kloen, John Kadzielski, David Helfet, Jesse B. Jupiter. Locking Compression Plates for Osteoporotic Nonunions of the Diaphyseal Humerus. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2004;425:50–54

Jan Korner, Gerd Diederichs, Michael Arzdorf, Helmut Lill, Christoph Josten, Erich Schneider, Berend Linke. A Biomechanical Evaluation of Methods of Distal Humerus Fracture Fixation Using Locking Compression Plates Versus Conventional Reconstruction Plates. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18:286–293,

Jan Korner, Helmut Lill, Lars Peter Muller, Pol Maria Rommens, Erich Schneider, Berend Linke. The LCP-concept in the operative treatment of distal humerus fractures-biological, biomechanical and surgical aspects. Injury, Int. J. Care Injured. 2003;34:20-30

Marvin Tile. Fractures of the Humerus In: Joseph Schatzker and Marvin Tile (eds.) The Rationale of Operative Fracture Care. 3rd ed. Springer, Berlin 2005: pp 97

McKee MD, Miranda MA, Reimer BL. Management of humeral nonunion after the failure of locking intramedullary nails. J Orthop Trauma. 1996;10:492-499

Edward A. Perez. Fractures of the Shoulder, Arm, and Forearm. In Campbell’s Operative Orthopaedics. 12th ed. S. Terry Canale and James H. Beaty (eds.). Mosby, Philadelphia, 2013, pp. 2853

Lisa A. Taitsman and David P. Barei. Humeral Shaft Fractures In Thomas E. Trumble, Jeffrey E. Budoff, Roger Cornwall (eds.). Core Knowledge in Orthopaedics Hand, Elbow, and Shoulder , Mosby, Philadelphia, 2006, pp. 552

Michael Wagner. General principles for the clinical use of the LCP. Injury, Int. J. Care Injured. 2003;34:1-12

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2020-09-14

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 2 (2020)

Section

Articles

License

Declaration and Copyright Transfer Form

(to be completed by authors)

I/ We, the undersigned author(s) of the submitted manuscript, hereby declare, that the above manuscript which is submitted for publication in the STM Journals(s), is not published already in part or whole (except in the form of abstract) in any journal or magazine for private or public circulation, and, is not under consideration of publication elsewhere.

  • I/We will not withdraw the manuscript after 1 week of submission as I have read the Author Guidelines and will adhere to the guidelines.
  • I/We Author(s ) have neither given nor will give this manuscript elsewhere for publishing after submitting in STM Journal(s).
  • I/ We have read the original version of the manuscript and am/ are responsible for the thought contents embodied in it. The work dealt in the manuscript is my/ our own, and my/ our individual contribution to this work is significant enough to qualify for authorship.
  •  I/We also agree to the authorship of the article in the following order:

Author’s name                                    

 

1. ________________

2. ________________

3. ________________

4. ________________

 

We  Author(s) tick this box and would request you to consider it as our signature as we agree to the terms of this Copyright Notice, which will apply to this submission if and when it is published by this journal.