Abstract
Background
Osteosynthesis using antegrade intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures yields satisfactory bone union rates; however, it may adversely affect postoperative shoulder function. To date, factors affecting mid- or long-term shoulder functional outcomes following intramedullary nail fixation have not been clarified. In this study, we aimed to identify the risk factors for poor mid-term functional outcomes over 5 years postoperatively following antegrade intramedullary nail osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fractures.
Methods
We retrospectively identified 33 patients who underwent surgery using an antegrade intramedullary nail for acute traumatic humeral shaft fractures and were followed up for at least 5 years postoperatively. We divided the patients into clinical failure and no clinical failure groups using an age- and sex-adjusted Constant score of 55 at the final follow-up as the cutoff value. We compared preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative factors between the two groups.
Results
Five of the 33 patients had poor shoulder functional outcomes (adjusted Constant score < 55) at a mean follow-up of 7.5 years postoperatively. Proximal protrusion of the nail at the time of bone union (P = 0.004) and older age (P = 0.009) were significantly associated with clinical failure in the univariate analyses. Multivariate analysis showed that proximal protrusion of the nail (P = 0.031) was a risk factor for poor outcomes.
Conclusions
The findings of this study provide new information on predictive factors affecting mid-term outcomes following osteosynthesis using antegrade nails. Our results demonstrated that proximal protrusion of the nail was significantly associated with poor mid-term functional shoulder outcomes. Therefore, particularly in older adults, it is essential to place the proximal end of the intramedullary nail below the level of the articular cartilage.
Similar content being viewed by others
Background
Osteosynthesis using an intramedullary nail for humeral shaft fractures provides solid stability and good load sharing, while minimizing soft tissue damage and preserving the periosteal blood supply at the fracture site [1, 2], resulting in satisfactory postoperative bone union rates [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]. Contrarily, antegrade intramedullary nailing has been reported to cause more shoulder complications, such as shoulder pain and decreased range of shoulder motion or muscle strength, compared with plate fixation [5, 7, 9, 11, 4, 13,14,15, 27]. Although placing the proximal end of the nail to anchor in the zone of dense subchondral bone is of critical importance in countering varus displacing force [28, 29], this study suggests that the nail should be inserted into the humeral head to avoid protrusion above the level of the articular cartilage. In cases where proximal nail protrusion remains at the time of bone union, nail removal has been reported to improve symptoms [7, 18] and can be a treatment option in such cases.
This study also showed that older age was significantly associated with poor mid-term shoulder functional outcomes in the univariate analysis. A previous study reported that all patients with unsatisfactory shoulder functional outcomes within two years after intramedullary nail fixation were older than 78 years [17], which concurs with the results of the present study. In addition, another study, including patients who underwent conservative therapy, plate fixation, or intramedullary nailing demonstrated an association between older age and poor shoulder function at 26 weeks and 52 weeks following injury [30]. However, multivariate analysis showed no significant association between older age and poor outcomes, possibly because of the confounding effect between nail protrusion and older age due to the effect of rotator cuff degeneration on the healing of the rotator cuff damaged during nail insertion and the osteoporotic loss of cortical bone in older age [18].
Unlike in a previous report [4], preoperative radial nerve injury was not significantly associated with clinical failure in this study. This disparity was attributed to the differences in the postoperative follow-up time. In this study, all patients with traumatic radial nerve injury improved over time, with only mild sensory deficits remaining at more than five years postoperatively, suggesting that preoperative radial nerve injury may affect the short-term shoulder functional outcomes and not the mid-term outcomes.
In addition, our results are different from those of previous reports showing an association between nonunion at six months after surgery and poor postoperative functional outcomes [13, 16]. The differences in the postoperative follow-up time can partly explain this discrepancy. All patients in this study who did not achieve union six months after surgery eventually achieved union within two years after surgery. This raises the possibility that the final bone union had little effect on the mid-term outcomes.
The strength of this study is that it evaluated mid-term shoulder functional outcomes following osteosynthesis for humeral shaft fractures. Previous studies on the postoperative outcomes of humeral shaft fractures have evaluated shoulder function at 1–3 years postoperatively [1, 2, 12]; till date, no study has assessed shoulder functional outcomes at more than five years postoperatively.
However, this study had some limitations. First, the cohort of patients available for analysis was small; therefore, our results may have included the effect of β-error. However, the sample size of most reported studies has been 20–40 patients [1, 2, 12], and our sample size is comparable to these studies. Second, due to the study’s observational nature, biases from unobserved differences may have affected the outcomes. For instance, although six surgeons performed the operations in this study, their skill levels were not taken into consideration. Moreover, the fact that the choice of implants depends on the surgeon’s preference could be a limitation of this study. Third, 16 patients were excluded owing to loss to follow-up, which may decrease the generalizability of the study results.
Conclusion
This study provides new information on predictive factors affecting mid-term outcomes following osteosynthesis using an antegrade nail. Our findings demonstrated that proximal protrusion of the nail was significantly associated with poor mid-term shoulder functional outcomes. Therefore, particularly in older adults, it is essential to place the proximal end of the intramedullary nail below the level of the articular cartilage.
Data availability
Data supporting this study’s findings are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Abbreviations
- ASES:
-
American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons
- VAS:
-
Visual analog scale
- BMI:
-
Body mass index
- AO:
-
Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen
- OR:
-
Odds ratio
- CI:
-
Confidence interval
References
Gallusser N, Barimani B, Vauclair F. Humeral shaft fractures. EFORT Open Rev. 2021;6:24–34.
Updegrove GF, Mourad W, Abboud JA. Humeral shaft fractures. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2018;27:e87–97.
Benegas E, Ferreira Neto AA, Gracitelli ME, Malavolta EA, Assunção JH, Prada S, et al. Shoulder function after surgical treatment of displaced fractures of the humeral shaft: a randomized trial comparing antegrade intramedullary nailing with minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2014;23:767–74.
Changulani M, Jain UK, Keswani T. Comparison of the use of the humerus intramedullary nail and dynamic compression plate for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. A randomised controlled study. Int Orthop. 2007;31:391–5.
Chapman JR, Henley MB, Agel J, Benca PJ. Randomized prospective study of humeral shaft fracture fixation: intramedullary nails versus plates. J Orthop Trauma. 2000;14:162–6.
Dimakopoulos P, Papadopoulos AX, Papas M, Panagopoulos A, Lambiris E. Modified extra rotator-cuff entry point in antegrade humeral nailing. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2005;125:27–32.
McCormack RG, Brien D, Buckley RE, McKee MD, Powell J, Schemitsch EH. Fixation of fractures of the shaft of the humerus by dynamic compression plate or intramedullary nail. A prospective, randomised trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82:336–9.
Park JY, Pandher DS, Chun JY, Md MD. Antegrade humeral nailing through the rotator cuff interval: a new entry portal. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22:419–25.
Putti AB, Uppin RB, Putti BB. Locked intramedullary nailing versus dynamic compression plating for humeral shaft fractures. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2009;17:139–41.
Rommens PM, Kuechle R, Bord T, Lewens T, Engelmann R, Blum J. Humeral nailing revisited. Injury. 2008;39:1319–28.
Singisetti K, Ambedkar M. Nailing versus plating in humerus shaft fractures: a prospective comparative study. Int Orthop. 2010;34:571–6.
Ouyang H, **ong J, **ang P, Cui Z, Chen L, Yu B. Plate versus intramedullary nail fixation in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures: an updated meta-analysis. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2013;22:387–95.
Ajmal M, O’Sullivan M, McCabe J, Curtin W. Antegrade locked intramedullary nailing in humeral shaft fractures. Injury. 2001;32:692–4.
Ingman AM, Waters DA. Locked intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures. Implant design, surgical technique, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76:23–9.
Robinson CM, Bell KM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM. Locked nailing of humeral shaft fractures. Experience in Edinburgh over a two-year period. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:558–62.
Flinkkilä T, Hyvönen P, Lakovaara M, Linden T, Ristiniemi J, Hämäläinen M. Intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures. A retrospective study of 126 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1999;70:133–6.
Ikpeme JO. Intramedullary interlocking nailing for humeral fractures: experiences with the Russell-Taylor humeral nail. Injury. 1994;25:447–55.
Cox MA, Dolan M, Synnott K, McElwain JP. Closed interlocking nailing of humeral shaft fractures with the Russell-Taylor nail. J Orthop Trauma. 2000;14:349–53.
Furuhata R, Kamata Y, Kono A, Kiyota Y, Morioka H. Influence of timing on surgical outcomes for acute humeral shaft fractures. Adv Orthop. 2021;2021:8977630.
Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;214:160–4.
Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ, Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 1994;3:347–52.
Tavakkolizadeh A, Ghassemi A, Colegate-Stone T, Latif A, Sinha J. Gender-specific constant score correction for age. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009;17:529–33.
Clement ND, Duckworth AD, McQueen MM, Court-Brown CM. The outcome of proximal humeral fractures in the elderly: predictors of mortality and function. Bone Joint J. 2014;96–B:970–7.
Mather J, MacDermid JC, Faber KJ, Athwal GS. Proximal humerus cortical bone thickness correlates with bone mineral density and can clinically rule out osteoporosis. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2013;22:732–8.
Neuhaus V, Menendez M, Kurylo JC, Dyer GS, Jawa A, Ring D. Risk factors for fracture mobility six weeks after initiation of brace treatment of mid-diaphyseal humeral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96:403–7.
Harkin FE, Large RJ. Humeral shaft fractures: union outcomes in a large cohort. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2017;26:1881–8.
Jensen CH, Hansen D, Jørgensen U. Humeral shaft fractures treated by interlocking nailing: a preliminary report on 16 patients. Injury. 1992;23:234–6.
Euler SA, Petri M, Venderley MB, Dornan GJ, Schmoelz W, Turnbull TL, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of straight antegrade nailing in proximal humeral fractures: the rationale of the proximal anchoring point. Int Orthop. 2017;41:1715–21.
Hepp P, Josten C. Biology and biomechanics in osteosynthesis of proximal humerus fractures. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2007;33:337–44.
Broadbent MR, Will E, McQueen MM. Prediction of outcome after humeral diaphyseal fracture. Injury. 2010;41:572–7.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank Masako Endo, Tomoyo Matsumura and Shiho Tanaka (Ashikaga Red Cross Hospital) for their contributions to the data collection in this study.
Funding
The authors certify that they or their institutions did not receive any support (e.g., grants, funding, payment, or other benefits) or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits in connection with the research or preparation of this manuscript. The authors also received no funding for the design of the study and the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data and in writing the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
RF: Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing-original draft. AT: Project administration, Writing-review & editing. SN: Investigation, Writing-original draft.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Ashikaga Red Cross Hospital Independent Ethics Committee (No. 2022-33). This retrospective study was performed according to the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Consent for publication
We obtained the written informed consent from all individual participants to publish the images and study results in a manner that does not reveal personally identifiable information such as patient names, dates of birth, address, or medical record ID.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
About this article
Cite this article
Furuhata, R., Tanji, A. & Nakamura, S. Risk factors of poor mid-term shoulder functional outcomes of osteosynthesis using antegrade intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft fractures: a retrospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 25, 456 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-07572-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-024-07572-1