Abstract
Introduction: Conservative treatment of humeral diaphyseal fractures yields reliable union rates with satisfactory clinical outcome. The high incidence of shoulder complications following intramedullary fixation of humeral fractures has led clinicians to consider other less invasive treatment modalities. There is a growing body of evidence supporting the role of functional bracing in the conservative management of these fractures.
Aims: To compare the outcome of patients with humeral fractures treated non-operatively using functional bracing and those treated by internal fixation.
Methods: Retrospective clinical and radiographic study of two groups of patients with humeral diaphyseal fractures matched for age, sex and mechanism of injury. The study group consisted of 46 patients who had presented to our institution between January 1999 and July 2002 with closed diaphyseal humeral fractures. Mean follow-up was 21 months 96–42 months). Patients were assessed for pain, range of motion, return to work and sporting activities. Group 1 comprised of patients who underwent functional bracing whereas Group 2 underwent internal fixation. There were 12 males and 10 females in Group 1, with a mean age of 42 (16–75 years). Group 2 comprised 13 males and 11 females, with a mean age of 37 years (20–80 years). Fourteen patients were treated with antegrade locked intramedullary nailing, whereas 10 patients underwent plate osteosynthesis. All functional braces were specifically moulded and customised for each patient by the senior upper limb occupational therapist. Three patients were lost to follow-up (Group 2).
Results: All patients treated with functional bracing went on to union at an average of 13 weeks (10–18 weeks). There were no major complications in this group. Two patients had residual loss of shoulder range of motion. Two patients had radial nerve palsies at presentation, which recovered fully. Of the twenty-one patients treated operatively, four required further procedures. Three patients had removal of IM nails with ORIF and bone grafting. One patient went on to non-union following ORIF, and had subsequent bone grafting. Eight patients developed restricted shoulder function, four requiring manipulations under anaesthesia.
Conclusion: Functional bracing of humeral diaphyseal fractures is a safe, non-invasive treatment providing reliable outcome and high rates of union. In this retrospective study, we found the results following functional bracing to be superior to that following internal fixation. Close supervision and patient compliance with treatment and rehabilitation is empiric to a satisfactory outcome in these patients.
The abstracts were prepared by Raymond Moran. Correspondence should be addressed to him at the Irish Orthopaedic Assocation, c/o Cappagh National Orthopaedic Hospital, Finglas, Dublin 11, Ireland.
