Subscribe to RSS
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1741444
How to Choose Between the Transolecranon and Triceps-Reflecting Approaches to Treat Distal Humerus Fractures in Adults: A Prospective Study[*]
Article in several languages: português | English
Abstract
Objective To choose an appropriate posterior approach for distal humerus fractures in adults.
Methods Fifty patients with distal humerus fractures were analyzed prospectively. The fractures were classified using the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO, Working Group for Bone Fusion Issues, in German/OTA) classification. The patients were divided into group A and group B. Olecranon osteotomy (the transolecranon approach) was performed in 30 patients, and the triceps-reflecting approach was used in 20 patients. The functional results were evaluated using the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.
Results The average operative time was of 92.62 ± 8.73 minutes for group A, and of 78.63 ± 7.02 minutes for group B, (p < 0.01), and the average blood loss was of 222.78 ± 34.93 mL for group A, and of 121.61 ± 19.85 mL for group B, (p < 0.01), which were statistically significant. The mean scores on the MEPS and DASH of both groups were found to be insignificant. Complications like infection, neurapraxia and soft tissue irritation where observed more in group A.
Conclusion The triceps-reflecting approach results in a shorter operative time, a lower levels of blood loss, and a low rate of complications, and olecranon osteotomy provides better accuracy in terms of articular reduction. But there were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the functional outcome. Therefore, we have proposed a new classification that is a modification of the AO/OTA classification: type 1 includes AO grades 13A to C2 (B3 excluded); and type 2, AO 13C3. For type-1 fractures, the triceps-reflecting approach may be considered, and, for type-2 fractures, olecranon osteotomy.
Financial Support
The present study did not receive financial support. All costs regarding the collection, analysis, interpretation of results and writing were covered exclusively by the authors.
* Study developed by the Department of orthopedic ESIC-PGIMSR, New Delhi, India.
Publication History
Received: 19 May 2021
Accepted: 20 September 2021
Article published online:
09 February 2022
© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil
-
Referências
- 1 Court-Brown C, Heckman JD, McKee M. editors. Rockwood and Green's Fractures in Adults. 8th ed.. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health; 2015
- 2 Rose SH, Melton 3rd LJ, Morrey BF, Ilstrup DM, Riggs BL. Epidemiologic features of humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982; (168) 24-30
- 3 Ring D, Jupiter JB, Gulotta L. Articular fractures of the distal part of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85 (02) 232-238
- 4 Singh H, Kanodia N, Singh R. Paratricipital two window approach for complex intraarticular distal humerus fractures: A prospective analysis of 27 patients. Chin J Traumatol 2019; 22 (06) 356-360
- 5 MacAusland WR. Ankylosis of the elbow: With report of four cases treated by arthroplasty. JAMA 1915; 64: 312-318
- 6 Alonso-Llames M. Bilaterotricipital approach to the elbow. Its application in the osteosynthesis of supracondylar fractures of the humerus in children. Acta Orthop Scand 1972; 43 (06) 479-490
- 7 Muller ME, Allgower M, Willenegger H, Schatzker J, Bandi W. Manual of Internal Fixation: Technique Recommended by the AO-Group. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1970
- 8 Jupiter JB, Mehne DK. Fractures of the distal humerus. Orthopedics 1992; 15 (07) 825-833
- 9 Morrey BF. Limited and extensile triceps reflecting exposures of the elbow. In: Morrey BF. editor. Master Techniques in Orthopaedic Surgery: The Elbow. New York: Raven Press; 1994: 3-20
- 10 Bhandary B, Shetty S, Kassim MS, Moha A. Open reduction internal fixation with triceps-sparing approach in distal humerus fracture: an experience from a tertiary level hospital in Mangalore. Int J Res Orthop 2019; 5 (02) 345-349
- 11 Ek ET, Goldwasser M, Bonomo AL. Functional outcome of complex intercondylar fractures of the distal humerus treated through a triceps-sparing approach. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008; 17 (03) 441-446
- 12 Ali AM, Hassanin EY, El-Ganainy AE, Abd-Elmola T. Management of intercondylar fractures of the humerus using the extensor mechanism-sparing paratricipital posterior approach. Acta Orthop Belg 2008; 74 (06) 747-752
- 13 Zhang C, Zhong B, Luo CF. Comparing approaches to expose type C fractures of the distal humerus for ORIF in elderly patients: six years clinical experience with both the triceps-sparing approach and olecranon osteotomy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2014; 134 (06) 803-811
- 14 Wilkinson JM, Stanley D. Posterior surgical approaches to the elbow: a comparative anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2001; 10 (04) 380-382
- 15 Fernández-Valencia JA, Muñoz-Mahamud E, Ballesteros JR, Prat S. Treatment of AO Type C Fractures of the Distal Part of the Humerus through the Bryan-Morrey Triceps-Sparing Approach. ISRN Orthop 2013; 2013: 525326
- 16 Chen G, Liao Q, Luo W, Li K, Zhao Y, Zhong D. Triceps-sparing versus olecranon osteotomy for ORIF: analysis of 67 cases of intercondylar fractures of the distal humerus. Injury 2011; 42 (04) 366-370
- 17 Iselin LD, Mett T, Babst R, Jakob M, Rikli D. The triceps reflecting approach (Bryan-Morrey) for distal humerus fracture osteosynthesis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2014; 15: 406