Loading…

Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures

The three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Injury 2017-08, Vol.48, p.S8-S13
Main Authors: Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil, Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay, Kulkarni, Govind Shivram, Goyal, Vaibhav, Kulkarni, Milind Govind
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13
container_end_page S13
container_issue
container_start_page S8
container_title Injury
container_volume 48
creator Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil
Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay
Kulkarni, Govind Shivram
Goyal, Vaibhav
Kulkarni, Milind Govind
description The three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published reports have a comparison of superiority of one procedure over the other. We evaluated the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of the three procedures. We studied adult patients with humerus shaft fractures over a period of 2 years from May 2014 to May 2016 in a level 1 trauma center. Forty-four were treated with IMN, 34 treated with ORPO, and 34 with MIPO. The null hypothesis tested in this study is that there is no difference between IMN, ORPO, MIPO with respect to union time, surgical time, complication rate, non-union rate and functional outcome. Functional outcome was studied by comparing the UCLA shoulder and MEP scores in the three groups. 112 patients were studied consisting of 83 males and 29 females with mean age of 39 years (range 18-70). IMN group showed early union with mean of 12.73 weeks compared to MIPO (14.45 weeks) and ORPO(13.58 weeks), (p
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30487-4
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1928785052</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0020138317304874</els_id><sourcerecordid>1928785052</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUuP0zAUhS0EYsrATwB52UoEbOdhe4VQxaPSDEU81pbj3EyNEjvYTlF-IP8LdzrMDrG6i_udc3XPQeg5Ja8ooc3rr4QwUtBSlGvKNyWpBC-qB2hFBZcFYQ1_iFb3yAV6EuMPQignZfkYXTAhCKtYs0K_t36cdLDRO9xC-gXgsHYJboLuAFuXgh6hm4dBhwU7bQfrbvB6d_1p8xL7KcMhb02yWT4NOgH2MYGPi0sHiDbi9f7L5_0mW3Z4tM6OehiWbHvU0R7hH5Lr3UliHU4BdBrBJex7fJhHCHPEndXTYYmgB9wHbdIcID5Fj3o9RHh2Ny_R9_fvvm0_Flf7D7vt26vCVJSnQhram1rSmhNiCO8lkVABy9MY3lay5mXftMy0vJWCUypqTWRTNaIhrK40LS_R-uw7Bf9zhpjUaKOBnI4DP0dFJRNc1KRmGa3PqAk-xgC9mkJ-PyyKEnVqUN02qE71KMrVbYOqyroXdyfmNid_r_pbWQbenAHIjx4tBBWNBWegswFMUp23_znxB8URroI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1928785052</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures</title><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil ; Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay ; Kulkarni, Govind Shivram ; Goyal, Vaibhav ; Kulkarni, Milind Govind</creator><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil ; Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay ; Kulkarni, Govind Shivram ; Goyal, Vaibhav ; Kulkarni, Milind Govind</creatorcontrib><description>The three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published reports have a comparison of superiority of one procedure over the other. We evaluated the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of the three procedures. We studied adult patients with humerus shaft fractures over a period of 2 years from May 2014 to May 2016 in a level 1 trauma center. Forty-four were treated with IMN, 34 treated with ORPO, and 34 with MIPO. The null hypothesis tested in this study is that there is no difference between IMN, ORPO, MIPO with respect to union time, surgical time, complication rate, non-union rate and functional outcome. Functional outcome was studied by comparing the UCLA shoulder and MEP scores in the three groups. 112 patients were studied consisting of 83 males and 29 females with mean age of 39 years (range 18-70). IMN group showed early union with mean of 12.73 weeks compared to MIPO (14.45 weeks) and ORPO(13.58 weeks), (p&lt;0.05). MIPO had no events of non-union, as compared to ORPO (5 non-unions) and IMN (10 non-unions), (p=0.04). The range of movement at the shoulder with the UCLA score was significantly better with a score of 32.26 in MIPO as compared to 27.54 in IMN and 28.82 in ORPO (p&lt;0.05). The difference in MEPS score in the three groups was not significant (p=0.31). IMN required a mean of 117.95 minutes intraoperatively as compared to 131 and 150.58 mins in MIPO, ORPO respectively. MIPO is overall better with respect to non-union, functional outcome and complications rate. The surgical time depends on the surgeons’ skill and learning curve. Thus considering the advantages and risks involved in the various procedure and surgical acumen, each case should be individualized to have a good outcome. We advocate that MIPO can be safely used as an alternative in treating these fractures.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0020-1383</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-0267</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30487-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28802426</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Bone Plates ; Comparative study ; Elbow Joint - physiopathology ; Elbow Joint - surgery ; Female ; Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - methods ; Fracture Healing - physiology ; Humans ; Humeral Fractures - physiopathology ; Humeral Fractures - surgery ; Humerus fracture ; IMN ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods ; MIPO ; Open Fracture Reduction - methods ; Operative Time ; ORPO ; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology ; Trauma ; Treatment Outcome ; Upperlimb ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Injury, 2017-08, Vol.48, p.S8-S13</ispartof><rights>2017 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28802426$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Govind Shivram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goyal, Vaibhav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Milind Govind</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures</title><title>Injury</title><addtitle>Injury</addtitle><description>The three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published reports have a comparison of superiority of one procedure over the other. We evaluated the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of the three procedures. We studied adult patients with humerus shaft fractures over a period of 2 years from May 2014 to May 2016 in a level 1 trauma center. Forty-four were treated with IMN, 34 treated with ORPO, and 34 with MIPO. The null hypothesis tested in this study is that there is no difference between IMN, ORPO, MIPO with respect to union time, surgical time, complication rate, non-union rate and functional outcome. Functional outcome was studied by comparing the UCLA shoulder and MEP scores in the three groups. 112 patients were studied consisting of 83 males and 29 females with mean age of 39 years (range 18-70). IMN group showed early union with mean of 12.73 weeks compared to MIPO (14.45 weeks) and ORPO(13.58 weeks), (p&lt;0.05). MIPO had no events of non-union, as compared to ORPO (5 non-unions) and IMN (10 non-unions), (p=0.04). The range of movement at the shoulder with the UCLA score was significantly better with a score of 32.26 in MIPO as compared to 27.54 in IMN and 28.82 in ORPO (p&lt;0.05). The difference in MEPS score in the three groups was not significant (p=0.31). IMN required a mean of 117.95 minutes intraoperatively as compared to 131 and 150.58 mins in MIPO, ORPO respectively. MIPO is overall better with respect to non-union, functional outcome and complications rate. The surgical time depends on the surgeons’ skill and learning curve. Thus considering the advantages and risks involved in the various procedure and surgical acumen, each case should be individualized to have a good outcome. We advocate that MIPO can be safely used as an alternative in treating these fractures.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Bone Plates</subject><subject>Comparative study</subject><subject>Elbow Joint - physiopathology</subject><subject>Elbow Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - methods</subject><subject>Fracture Healing - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Humeral Fractures - physiopathology</subject><subject>Humeral Fractures - surgery</subject><subject>Humerus fracture</subject><subject>IMN</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>MIPO</subject><subject>Open Fracture Reduction - methods</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>ORPO</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</subject><subject>Trauma</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Upperlimb</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0020-1383</issn><issn>1879-0267</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkUuP0zAUhS0EYsrATwB52UoEbOdhe4VQxaPSDEU81pbj3EyNEjvYTlF-IP8LdzrMDrG6i_udc3XPQeg5Ja8ooc3rr4QwUtBSlGvKNyWpBC-qB2hFBZcFYQ1_iFb3yAV6EuMPQignZfkYXTAhCKtYs0K_t36cdLDRO9xC-gXgsHYJboLuAFuXgh6hm4dBhwU7bQfrbvB6d_1p8xL7KcMhb02yWT4NOgH2MYGPi0sHiDbi9f7L5_0mW3Z4tM6OehiWbHvU0R7hH5Lr3UliHU4BdBrBJex7fJhHCHPEndXTYYmgB9wHbdIcID5Fj3o9RHh2Ny_R9_fvvm0_Flf7D7vt26vCVJSnQhram1rSmhNiCO8lkVABy9MY3lay5mXftMy0vJWCUypqTWRTNaIhrK40LS_R-uw7Bf9zhpjUaKOBnI4DP0dFJRNc1KRmGa3PqAk-xgC9mkJ-PyyKEnVqUN02qE71KMrVbYOqyroXdyfmNid_r_pbWQbenAHIjx4tBBWNBWegswFMUp23_znxB8URroI</recordid><startdate>201708</startdate><enddate>201708</enddate><creator>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil</creator><creator>Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay</creator><creator>Kulkarni, Govind Shivram</creator><creator>Goyal, Vaibhav</creator><creator>Kulkarni, Milind Govind</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201708</creationdate><title>Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures</title><author>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil ; Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay ; Kulkarni, Govind Shivram ; Goyal, Vaibhav ; Kulkarni, Milind Govind</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Bone Plates</topic><topic>Comparative study</topic><topic>Elbow Joint - physiopathology</topic><topic>Elbow Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - methods</topic><topic>Fracture Healing - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Humeral Fractures - physiopathology</topic><topic>Humeral Fractures - surgery</topic><topic>Humerus fracture</topic><topic>IMN</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>MIPO</topic><topic>Open Fracture Reduction - methods</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>ORPO</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</topic><topic>Trauma</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Upperlimb</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Govind Shivram</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goyal, Vaibhav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kulkarni, Milind Govind</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Injury</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kulkarni, Vidisha Sunil</au><au>Kulkarni, Madhura Sujay</au><au>Kulkarni, Govind Shivram</au><au>Goyal, Vaibhav</au><au>Kulkarni, Milind Govind</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures</atitle><jtitle>Injury</jtitle><addtitle>Injury</addtitle><date>2017-08</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>48</volume><spage>S8</spage><epage>S13</epage><pages>S8-S13</pages><issn>0020-1383</issn><eissn>1879-0267</eissn><abstract>The three currently used methods of treatment: namely open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO), Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO), antegrade intramedullary nailing(IMN) are all reported as satisfactory procedures for treatment of humeral shaft fractures. However none of the published reports have a comparison of superiority of one procedure over the other. We evaluated the clinical, radiological and functional outcome of the three procedures. We studied adult patients with humerus shaft fractures over a period of 2 years from May 2014 to May 2016 in a level 1 trauma center. Forty-four were treated with IMN, 34 treated with ORPO, and 34 with MIPO. The null hypothesis tested in this study is that there is no difference between IMN, ORPO, MIPO with respect to union time, surgical time, complication rate, non-union rate and functional outcome. Functional outcome was studied by comparing the UCLA shoulder and MEP scores in the three groups. 112 patients were studied consisting of 83 males and 29 females with mean age of 39 years (range 18-70). IMN group showed early union with mean of 12.73 weeks compared to MIPO (14.45 weeks) and ORPO(13.58 weeks), (p&lt;0.05). MIPO had no events of non-union, as compared to ORPO (5 non-unions) and IMN (10 non-unions), (p=0.04). The range of movement at the shoulder with the UCLA score was significantly better with a score of 32.26 in MIPO as compared to 27.54 in IMN and 28.82 in ORPO (p&lt;0.05). The difference in MEPS score in the three groups was not significant (p=0.31). IMN required a mean of 117.95 minutes intraoperatively as compared to 131 and 150.58 mins in MIPO, ORPO respectively. MIPO is overall better with respect to non-union, functional outcome and complications rate. The surgical time depends on the surgeons’ skill and learning curve. Thus considering the advantages and risks involved in the various procedure and surgical acumen, each case should be individualized to have a good outcome. We advocate that MIPO can be safely used as an alternative in treating these fractures.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>28802426</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30487-4</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0020-1383
ispartof Injury, 2017-08, Vol.48, p.S8-S13
issn 0020-1383
1879-0267
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1928785052
source Elsevier
subjects Adult
Aged
Bone Plates
Comparative study
Elbow Joint - physiopathology
Elbow Joint - surgery
Female
Fracture Fixation, Intramedullary - methods
Fracture Healing - physiology
Humans
Humeral Fractures - physiopathology
Humeral Fractures - surgery
Humerus fracture
IMN
Male
Middle Aged
Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods
MIPO
Open Fracture Reduction - methods
Operative Time
ORPO
Range of Motion, Articular - physiology
Trauma
Treatment Outcome
Upperlimb
Young Adult
title Comparison between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN), open reduction plate osteosynthesis (ORPO) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) in treatment of humerus diaphyseal fractures
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T17%3A51%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20between%20antegrade%20intramedullary%20nailing%20(IMN),%20open%20reduction%20plate%20osteosynthesis%20(ORPO)%20and%20minimally%20invasive%20plate%20osteosynthesis%20(MIPO)%20in%20treatment%20of%20humerus%20diaphyseal%20fractures&rft.jtitle=Injury&rft.au=Kulkarni,%20Vidisha%20Sunil&rft.date=2017-08&rft.volume=48&rft.spage=S8&rft.epage=S13&rft.pages=S8-S13&rft.issn=0020-1383&rft.eissn=1879-0267&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0020-1383(17)30487-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1928785052%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9c1fc5915700c07f909e4e2f90cc7b49573f6b2cb7b9871185a09646860254a13%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1928785052&rft_id=info:pmid/28802426&rfr_iscdi=true