ACE Report Cover
Locking Compression Plate Fixation vs. Interlocking Nail Fixation for Humeral Shaft Fractures
Language
Download
Cite
+ Favorites
Language
Download
Cite
+ Favorites
AceReport Image
SHOULDER & ELBOW
Locking Compression Plate Fixation vs. Interlocking Nail Fixation for Humeral Shaft Fractures .

Locking compression plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures: which one is better? A single-centre prospective randomized study.

Int Orthop. 2020 Oct;44(10):2113-2121.

Sixty-three patients with displaced humerus shaft fractures less than 2 weeks old requiring surgery were randomized to undergo locking plate fixation (LCP; n=33) or interlocking nail (ILN; n=30) fixation. The outcomes of interest included function evaluated using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder scores, the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire, and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS), and incidence of complications (i.e. iatrogenic radial injury, re-operation for nonunion, superficial infection, and deep infection). As well, time to fracture union, length of hospital stay, and time of operation were also recorded. Outcomes were measured at the time of first callus observation, and again at 24 months post-surgery. Sub-group analysis were conducted according to fracture type, specifically AO classification type A, and AO types B and C. Results demonstrated that VAS pain (p=0.017) and UCLA scores (p=0.034) for function were statistically significantly in favour of the LCP group vs ILN group at 24 months post-operation. Moreover, no cases of deep infection was observed in any of the groups and no statistical significant differences was recorded between the 2 groups with respect to incidence of complications (p>0.05). In the subgroup analysis of AO Type A fractures, DASH score was statistically significantly in favour of the LCP group at first callus observation (p=0.029), but this difference was not observed at 24-months follow-up. Moreover, when comparing LCP AO Type A fracture vs ILN Types B and C fracture, VAS pain was statistically significantly improved in favour of the LCP AO Type A at 24-months follow-up (p=0.037). Comparing LCP AO Types B and C fractures to ILN AO Type A fractures, ASES scores were statistically significantly improved at first callus observation (p=0.027) in the LCP AO Types B and C group; all other outcomes were not statistically significantly different between the 2 groups (p>0.05). The length of surgical time was statistically significantly longer in the LCP group (p=0.001). The LCP group had a statistically significantly shorter hospital stay compared to the ILN group (p=0.043).

Unlock the Full ACE Report

You have access to 4 more FREE articles this month.
Click below to unlock and view this ACE Reports
Unlock Now

Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics

Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics

Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions

Exclusive access to original content articles, including in-house systematic reviews, and articles on health research methods and hot orthopaedic topics

Or upgrade today and gain access to all OrthoEvidence
content for as little as $1.99 per week.
0 of 4 monthly FREE articles unlocked
You've reached your limit of 4 free articles views this month

Access to OrthoEvidence for as little as $1.99 per week.

Stay connected with latest evidence. Cancel at any time.
  • Critical appraisals of the latest, high-impact randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews in orthopaedics
  • Access to OrthoEvidence podcast content, including collaborations with the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviews with internationally recognized surgeons, and roundtable discussions on orthopaedic news and topics
  • Subscription to The Pulse, a twice-weekly evidence-based newsletter designed to help you make better clinical decisions
Upgrade
Welcome Back!
Forgot Password?
Start your FREE trial today!

Account will be affiliated with


OR
Forgot Password?

OR
Please check your email

If an account exists with the provided email address, a password reset email will be sent to you. If you don't see an email, please check your spam or junk folder.

For further assistance, contact our support team.

Translate ACE Report

OrthoEvidence utilizes a third-party translation service to make content accessible in multiple languages. Please note that while every effort is made to ensure accuracy, translations may not always be perfect.

Cite this ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Locking Compression Plate Fixation vs. Interlocking Nail Fixation for Humeral Shaft Fractures. ACE Report. 2021;10(1):26. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/locking-compression-plate-fixation-vs-interlocking-nail-fixation-for-humeral-shaft-fractures

Copy Citation
Please login to enable this feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into an active OrthoEvidence account. Please log in or create a FREE trial account.

Premium Member Feature

To access this feature, you must be logged into a premium OrthoEvidence account.

Share this ACE Report