Treatment of the Humeral Shaft Aseptic Nonunion Using Plate or Unilateral External Fixator

Authors:
  • MBMitkovic Milorad Borivoje
    Mitkovic Milorad Borivoje
  • MSMladenovic Desimir Svetomir
    Mladenovic Desimir Svetomir
  • GZGolubovic Velimir Zoran
    Golubovic Velimir Zoran
  • IJIn-Ho Jeon
    In-Ho Jeon
Publisher website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Although the use of a plate and bone graft is described as a well-known treatment for aseptic humeral shaft nonunion, unilateral external fixator can be alternative as a minimally invasive method. There has been no report comparing two methods of plate and external fixator for humeral shaft nonunion. Also, a few studies described humeral shaft aseptic nonunion treatment using unilateral external fixator. We retrospectively reviewed 31 patients (15 men and 16 women) with aseptic humeral shaft nonunion treated by plate (n = 20) and unilateral external fixator (n = 11). Patients were followed for a mean of 31.8 months. The right upper arm was involved in 19 patients (17 dominant) and left in 12 patients (2 dominant). The inclusion criteria were aseptic, middle shaft nonunion, without bone defects more than 2 cm. Four patients had hypertrophic, and 27 patients had atrophic nonunion. Solid union, as documented on plain radiographic views, was obtained in 28 (90.3%) patients without additional operation. The average operative time was 92.8 minutes in plate group and 47.8 minutes in external fixator group (p < 0.05). The average blood loss was 142.5 mL in plate group and it was 45.5 mL in external fixator group (p < 0.05). Average hospital stay was 10.9 days in plate group and 3.9 days for external fixator group (p < 0.05). Overall, healing time in the plate group was 4.4 months, compared with 3.6 months in the external fixation group (p < 0.05). The mean Constant and Murley score for plate group was 85.6 points and it was 74.3 points for the external fixator group. According to Stewart and Hundley criteria, 16 (80%) patients in the plate group and 6 (54.5%) patients in the external fixator group had good outcome. Two-pin track infection of the external fixator (18.2%) and two transient radial nerve palsy (10%) were recorded. In this retrospective study of the humeral shaft nonunion, unilateral external fixator tended to yield equally favorable treatment results as did plate fixation. Advantages of the plate are good stability on the nonunion site and comfortability for patient. On the contrary, the advantages of the unilateral external fixator are minimal exposure to the nonunion site with minimal surgical trauma to the soft tissue, easy application of the fixator and consecutively minimal blood loss and short operative time. Unilateral external fixator could be a valuable alternative to plate fixation in aseptic humeral shaft nonunions.

This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit: