InSafeLOCK® humeral nailing for humeral nonunions: Clinical and radiological results

Polat, Oktay; Toy, Serdar; Kibar, Birkan

doi:10.52312/jdrs.2021.81535

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 22 publications

(41 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Identification of callus formation on three cortices and absence of pain on the fracture site were defined as successful union. [16] whereas it was defined as a non-union if fracture healing was not achieved in 6-month follow-up. Radiographic calculations were also made to determine varus and valgus malalignment.…”

Section: Data Collection and Evaluation Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Is MIPO as Safe and Effective as Conventional ORIF for Simple Fractures of Humerus Diaphysis?

Çalışkan¹

2023

Comprehensive Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to compare radiological, functional, and clinical results of minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and conventional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) techniques in simple fractures of humerus diaphysis (AO/OTA 12A2b and AO/OTA 12A3b). Materials and Methods:We retrospectively evaluated 51 patients who were operated in our clinic for simple fractures of humerus diaphysis (AO/OTA 12A2b and AO/OTA 12A3b) between 2016 and 2021. Group A included patients treated by MIPO while Group B consisted of patients treated by conventional ORIF. Radiological outcomes were determined by fracture union, varus, and valgus malalignment. We evaluated clinical parameters by calculating deep tissue infection, injury to the radial nerve, and implant failure rates. We made the functional assessment by calculating QuickDASH, UCLASS, MEPI, and ROM. Results:We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding radiological outcomes except that varus angulation was determined to be higher in the MIPO group (p<0.001). We followed the obligation of the Helsinki Declaration in our research. The clinical and functional evaluations did not reveal any statistically significant difference between the two surgical techniques. Conclusion:MIPO technique for simple fractures of humerus diaphysis demonstrated similar radiological, functional, and clinical outcomes to conventional ORIF technique. Thus, we believe that MIPO technique may be as safe and effective as conventional ORIF technique.

show abstract

Section: Data Collection and Evaluation Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Is MIPO as Safe and Effective as Conventional ORIF for Simple Fractures of Humerus Diaphysis?

Çalışkan¹

2023

Comprehensive Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…89, 2022, No. 2 ORIGINAL PAPER PŮVODNÍ PRÁCE Many fixation methods have been recommended for nonunion of the humeral shaft, including single or dual plates fixation augmented with autologous bone graft, the intramedullary device with bone morphogenetic proteins, cortical augmentation with the fibular strut, and fixation with Ilizarov apparatus (6,11,14,20,26).…”

Section: Surgical Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Intramedullary nailing is a less invasive method compared to open reduction and plating. However, although it is a locked implant, nonunion rates of up to 29% have been shown due to the axial and rotational instability that still needs a solution (20). There are also publications reporting good results in the literatüre (20).…”

Section: /mentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Compressive Intramedullary Nailing an Effective Method in Aseptic Humerus Nonunions without Bone Defects?

İnci¹,

V²,

Duygun³

et al. 2022

Acta Chir. orthop. Traum. Cech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE OF THE STUDYTreatment of nonunion of humerus continues to be a matter of debate. For this purpose, many treatment methods have been reported. The aim of this retrospective cohort study is to evaluate the results of patients who underwent revision surgery with compressive intramedullary nailing implemented a single type of surgical technique in aseptic humeral nonunions without bone defects. MATERIAL AND METHODSData of 15 patients with humerus nonunion, all were treated with compressive intramedullary nailing between 2000 and 2019 were retrospectively evaluated. Three patients were hypertrophic and 12 were atrophic types. The mean ages of patients at the surgery was 47.3±18 years. In all cases, maximal bone contact was created between the proximal and distal bone fragments after reaming and debridement, and fixation was performed with compressive intramedullary nailing. Radiological assessment of union was performed based on the RUSHU criteria, and functional outcomes were assessed according to Constant-Murley scoring criteria. RESULTSThe ten out of 15 patients were male. The radiological union was achieved at a mean duration of 16.6±2.3 weeks in 14 patients. The average time of follow-up after nonunion treatment was 25.2±8.8 months. Twelve out of 15 patients implemented bone grafting taken form iliac bone with spongiosa obtained via reaming. The functional results were made according to the Constant-Murley score and excellent functional results were obtained in nine patients, good in four patients and poor functional results in one patient. Implant failure was not observed. One patient has had post-operative transient ulnar nerve palsy and another patient developed transient radial nerve palsy. CONCLUSIONSCompressive intramedullary nailing is a useful method that provides excellent union in the surgical treatment of aseptic non-union of the humerus, without bone defects.

show abstract

InSafeLOCK® humeral nailing for humeral nonunions: Clinical and radiological results

Cited by 2 publications

References 22 publications

Is MIPO as Safe and Effective as Conventional ORIF for Simple Fractures of Humerus Diaphysis?

Is MIPO as Safe and Effective as Conventional ORIF for Simple Fractures of Humerus Diaphysis?

Is Compressive Intramedullary Nailing an Effective Method in Aseptic Humerus Nonunions without Bone Defects?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About