Comparing Fin Intramedullary Nailing with Standard Locked Intramedullary Nailing in the Fixation of Humeral Shaft Fractures
Keywords:
Bio‑nail, external jig, fin nail, humeral shaft fracture, interlocking intramedullary nailingAbstract
Background: Standard interlocking intramedullary nailing of the humeral shaft fractures has its attending complications such as difficulty in locking the nail distally and associated nerve injuries. Aim: To compare the rate of fracture healing, functional outcome and complication rate between SIGN standard locked intramedullary nail (SSLIN) and SIGN intramedullary fin nail (SIFN) in the management of humeral shaft fractures. Method: This is a retrospective comparative study comprising of patients who were treated with either SSLIN or SIFN for humeral shaft fractures. They were followed up until full activities of daily living was achieved. Data collected were processed with SPSS. Comparisons were made between the two groups using student t-test for the continuous variables and Chi-square for the categorical variables. Results: Forty-three patients with humeral shaft fracture were included in this study. Thirty-one of them constituted the SSLIN group while 12 of them constituted the SIFN group. At 6 weeks, radiographic evidence of fracture healing was seen in 64.5% and 58.3% of the patients in the SSLIN and SIFN groups respectively and by the third month, 96.8% and 100% of the patients respectively had achieved radiographic evidence of fracture healing. The differences were not significantly different. There was also no significant difference in the findings from the comparative assessment of functional outcomes in both groups. Conclusion: SIFN compared favorably with the SSLIN in terms of rate of fracture healing and resumption of functional activities. SIFN is therefore encouraged to be used for humeral shaft fractures.
References
1. Mahabier KC, Vogels LM, Punt BJ, Roukema GR, Patka P,van Lieshout EM. Humeral shaft fractures: Retrospective resultsof non‑operative and operative treatment of 186 patients. Injury2013;44:427‑30.
2. Rose SH, Melton LJ 3rd, Morrey BF, Ilstrup DM, Riggs BL. Epidemiologic features of humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res1982:24‑30.
3. Fan Y, Li YW, Zhang HB, Liu JF, Han XM, Chang X, et al. Managementof humeral shaft fractures with intramedullary interlocking nail versuslocking compression plate. Orthopedics 2015;38:e825‑9.
4. Changulani M, Jain UK, Keswani T. Comparison of the use of thehumerus intramedullary nail and dynamic compression plate for themanagement of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. A randomisedcontrolled study. Int Orthop 2007;31:391‑5.
5. Kumar R, Singh P, Chaudhary LJ, Singh S. Humeral shaft fracturemanagement, a prospective study; nailing or plating. J Clin OrthopTrauma 2012;3:37‑42.
6. Crates J, Whittle AP. Antegrade interlocking nailing of acute humeralshaft fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1998:40‑50.
7. Kandemir U, Herfat S, Herzog M, Viscogliosi P, Pekmezci M. Fatiguefailure in extra‑articular proximal tibia fractures: Locking intramedullarynail versus double locking plates - A biomechanical study. J OrthopTrauma 2017;31:e49‑54.
8. Kolonja A, Vecsei N, Mousavi M, Marlovits S, Machold W,Vecsei V. Radial nerve injury after anterograde and retrograde lockedintramedullary nailing of humerus. A clinical and anatomical study. Osteosynthesis Trauma Care 2002;10:197‑9.
9. Blyth MJ, Macleod CM, Asante DK, Kinninmonth AW. Iatrogenic nerveinjury with the Russell‑Taylor humeral nail. Injury 2003;34:227‑8.
10. Garnavos C. Diaphyseal humeral fractures and intramedullary nailing:Can we improve outcomes? Indian J Orthop 2011;45:208‑15.
11. Wong MW, Chow DH, Li CK. Rotational stability of Seidel nail distallocking mechanism. Injury 2005;36:1201‑5.
12. Giudice F, La Rosa G, Russo T, Varsalona R. Evaluation andimprovement of the efficiency of the Seidel humeral nail bynumerical‑experimental analysis of the bone‑implant contact. Med EngPhys 2006;28:682‑93.
13. Garnavos C. Humeral nails: When to choose what and how to use. Current Orthopaedics 2005;19:294‑304.
14. Franck WM, Olivieri M, Jannasch O, Hennig FF. Expandable nailsystem for osteoporotic humeral shaft fractures: Preliminary results.J Trauma 2003;54:1152‑8.
15. Marchetti PG, Vicenzi G, Impallomeni C, Landi S, Surdo V. The useof elastic nails for intramedullary fixation of humeral fractures andnonunions. Orthopedics 2000;23:343‑7.
16. Halder S, Chapman J, Choudhury G, Wallace W. Retrograde fixation offractures of the neck and shaft of the humerus with the ‘Halder humeralnail’. Injury 2001;32:695‑703.
17. SIGN Fracture Care International. Technique Manual of SIGN IMNail & Interlocking Screw System Insertion & Extraction Guide;2016. Available from: https://www.signfracturecare.org. [Last accessedon 2020 Mar 14].
18. Liu MB, Ali SH, Haonga BT, Eliezer EN, Albright PD, Morshed S, et al. Surgical Implant Generation Network (SIGN) Fin nail versus SIGNstandard intramedullary nail for distal diaphyseal femur fractures treatedvia retrograde approach. Injury 2019;50:1725‑30.
19. Chao TC, Chou WY, Chung JC, Hsu CJ. Humeral shaft fractures treatedby dynamic compression plates, Ender nails and interlocking nails. IntOrthop 2005;29:88‑91.
20. Raja Gopal H, Madan Mohan M, Pilar A, Tamboowalla K. Functionaloutcome of ante grade interlocking intramedullary nailing for humeralshaft fractures. Int J Res Orthopaedics 2017;3:1127.
21. Ikem I, Esan O, Orimolade E, Adetiloye A, Toluse A. External jig in theplacement of distal interlocking screws. Niger J Orthopaedics Trauma2011;10:28‑31.
22. Ikem IC, Ogunlusi JD, Ine HR. Achieving interlocking nails withoutusing an image intensifier. Int Orthop 2007;31:487‑90.
23. Chandan RK, Sinha V, Bhushan D. Comparison of results betweendynamic compression plate and interlocking nail for the management offracture shaft of humerus. Int J Orthopaedics 2020;6:249‑52.
24. Bhat S, Rao SK, Ortho D. The functional outcome of antegrade unreamedhumeral interlocking nailing in adults. J. Orthopaedics 2005;2e2.
25. Simon P, Jobard D, Bistour L, Babin SR. Complications of Marchettilocked nailing for humeral shaft fractures. Int Orthop 1999;23:320‑4.
26. Riemer BL, Butterfield SL, D’Ambrosia R, Kellam J. Seidelintramedullary nailing of humeral diaphyseal fractures: A preliminaryreport. Orthopedics 1991;14:239‑46.
27. Bain GI, Sandow MJ, Howie DW. Treatment of humeral shaft fractureswith the Seidel intramedullary nail. Aust N Z J Surg 1996;66:156‑8.
28. Attum B, Obremskey W. Treatment of humeral shaft fractures: A criticalanalysis review. JBJS Rev 2015;3:e5.
29. Gonçalves FF, Dau L, Grassi CA, Palauro FR, Martins Neto AA,Pereira PC. Evaluation of the surgical treatment of humeral shaftfractures and comparison between surgical fixation methods. Rev BrasOrtop 2018;53:136‑41.
30. Bhandari M, Guyatt GH, Swiontkowski MF, Tornetta P 3rd, Sprague S,Schemitsch EH. A lack of consensus in the assessment of fracturehealing among orthopaedic surgeons. J Orthop Trauma 2002;16:562‑6.
31. Morshed S, Corrales L, Genant H, Miclau T 3rd. Outcome assessmentin clinical trials of fracture‑healing. J Bone Joint Surg Am2008;90 Suppl 1:62‑7.
32. Hammer RR, Hammerby S, Lindholm B. Accuracy of radiologicassessment of tibial shaft fracture union in humans. Clin Orthop RelatRes 1985;199:233‑8.
33. Blokhuis TJ, de Bruine JH, Bramer JA, den Boer FC, Bakker FC,Patka P, et al. The reliability of plain radiography in experimentalfracture healing. Skeletal Radiol 2001;30:151‑6.
34. Davis BJ, Roberts PJ, Moorcroft CI, Brown MF, Thomas PB, Wade RH. Reliability of radiographs in defining union of internally fixed fractures.Injury 2004;35:557‑61.
35. Morshed S. Current Options for Determining Fracture Union. Adv Med2014;2014:708574.
36. Ruffilli A, Traina F, Pilla F, Fenga D, Faldini C. Marchetti Vicenzi elasticretrograde nail in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures: Review of thecurrent literature. Musculoskelet Surg 2015;99:201‑9.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Stephen Adosope Adesina, Olalekan Akeem Anipole, Samuel Uwale Eyesan, Innocent Chiedu Ikem, Akinsola Idowu Akinwumi, Philip Oluyemi Bamigboye, Oluwafemi Oyewole Oyewusi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors publishing in the Nigerian Journal of Orthopaedics and Trauma retain the copyright to their work.
All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
