Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (2024)

Updated: May 2 2024

Alec Kellish Rothman Institute
Brian Weatherford MD Illinois Bone and Joint Institute

Humeral Shaft Fractures

Prepare

0 %

Practice

0 %

Assess

0.0

Images

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (1)

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (2)

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (3)

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (4)

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (5)

  • Summary

    • Humeral shaft fractures are common fractures of the diaphysis of the humerus, which may be associated with radial nerve injury.

    • Diagnosis is made with orthogonal radiographs of the humerus.

    • Treatment can be nonoperative or operative depending on location of fracture, fracture morphology, and association with other ipsilateral injuries.

  • Epidemiology

    • Incidence

      • 3-5% of all fractures

      • 7 to 11.3 per 100,000

    • Demographics

      • age

        • 60% occur in patients olderthan 50 years

        • bimodal age distribution

          • young

            • high-energy trauma

            • peak incidence in third decade of life

        • elderly patients

          • low energy falls

          • osteopenic patients

      • sex

        • 70% occur in men when ageless than 50

        • 70% occur in women when agegreater than 50

      • Location

        • 30% occur in the proximalthird of the humeral shaft

        • 60% occur in the middlethird of the humeral shaft

          • Most common location

        • 10% occur in the distalthird of the humeral shaft

      • Risk factors

        • previous fracturehistory

        • smoking in men

        • elderly age

        • osteoporosis

  • Etiology

    • Pathophysiology

      • mechanism of injury

        • ground level fall (60%)

          • most common mechanism

        • motor vehicle accident (~30%)

          • 2nd most common mechanism

        • pathologic fractures (4.3%)

        • open fractures (3%)

      • proximalthird humeral shaft fractures

        • commonin older individuals

        • oftenresults from fall onto an outstretched hand resulting in impaction fracture atthe surgical neck

      • middlethird humeral shaft fractures

        • transversefracture

          • resultof a direct blow to the arm

        • spiralfracture

          • resultsfrom a fall onto an outstretched hand or from torsional force

      • distalthird humeral shaft fractures

        • resultfrom fall onto a flexed elbow

    • Associatedconditions

      • floating elbow

        • fracture of the humeral shaft and the proximal to middle radius and ulna

        • often occurs as a result of a high-energy trauma

        • morecommon in pediatric patients than in adults

      • ipsilateralshoulder dislocation

        • uncommoninjury pattern

        • dislocationis most likely to be a posterior dislocation rather than an anteriordislocation

  • Anatomy

    • Osteology

      • humeral shaft extends fromthe surgical neck of the humerus to the supracondylar ridge and is cylindricalin shape

      • distally humerus becomestriangular with the formation of the medial and lateral supracondylar ridges

      • intramedullary canalterminates 2 to 3 cm proximal to the olecranon fossa

      • radial groove is adepression along the posterolateral aspect of the humerus where the radialnerve and profunda brachii artery traverse

    • Arthrology

      • articulates with scapulaproximally and distally with the radius and ulna

    • Muscles

      • insertion for

        • pectoralis major

        • deltoid

          • will abduct proximal fragment in fracturesoccurring proximal to the insertion of the pectoralis major

        • coracobrachialis

      • origin for

        • brachialis

        • triceps

        • brachioradialis

    • Nerve

      • radial nerve

        • exits axilla posterior tothe brachial artery

        • enters the posteriorcompartment of the arm through the triangular interval

        • runs between the medial andlong head of the triceps

        • radial nerve is found medial to the long and lateral heads and 2cm proximal to the deep head of the triceps

        • courses along the spiral groovethen become anterior to the humerus

          • ~7.5cm from the articularsurface

        • radial nerve exits the posterior compartment through the lateral intramuscular septum 10 cm proximal to radiocapitellar joint

          • 20cm proximal to the medial epicondyle

          • 14cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle

      • ulnar nerve

        • Enters the posterior compartmentat the arcade of Struthers and runs medially towards cubital tunnel

        • ~8cmfrom the medial epicondyle

      • axillary nerve

        • runs posterior to anterior around the proximal humerus 4 to 7cm from the tipof the acromion

  • Classification

    • OTA

      • bone number: 1

      • fracture location: 2

      • fracture pattern: simple:A, wedge:B, complex:C

    • Garnavos classification

      • location

        • P: proximal

        • M: middle

        • D: distal

        • j: extension into the joint

      • morphology

        • S: simple

          • T: transverse or oblique

          • S: spiral

        • I: intermediate

          • one or two sizable butterfly fragments

        • C: complex

          • three or more butterfly fragments, or significant comminution

    • Descriptive

      • fracture location: proximal, middle or distal third

      • fracture pattern: spiral, transverse, comminuted

    • Holstein-Lewis fracture

      • a spiral fracture of the distal one-third of the humeral shaft commonly associated with neuropraxia of the radial nerve (7-22% incidence)

        • increases risk of radialnerve entrapment with the fracture

  • Presentation

    • Symptoms

      • pain

      • extremity weakness

    • Physical exam

      • swelling

      • tenderness over the fracture site

      • skin tenting

      • examinination of overall limb alignment for deformity

        • will often present with shortening and in varus

      • preoperative or pre-reduction neurovascular exam is critical

        • examine and document status of radial nerve pre and post-reduction

          • wrist and thumb interphalangeal joint extension

          • sensation over the dorsum of the hand

  • Imaging

    • Radiographs

      • views

        • AP and lateral

          • be sure to include joint above and below the site of injury

        • transthoracic lateral

          • may give better appreciation of sagittal plane deformity

          • rotating the patient prevents rotation of the distal fragment avoiding further nerve or soft tissue injury

        • traction views

          • may be necessary for fractures with significant shortening, proximal or distal extension but not routinely indicated

    • CT scan

      • may be utilized if there is concern for intra-articular extension

    • CTA

      • may be indicated if there is concern for vascular injury

    • Electromyography (EMG)

      • indicated in the setting of nerve palsy to assess for nerve recovery,but is not indicated acutely as it will not dictate fracture management

  • Treatment

    • Nonoperative

      • immobilization (coaptation splintor hanging arm cast for 7 to 10 daysfollowed by a functional brace)

        • indications

          • indicated in vast majority of humeral shaft fractures

            • criteria for acceptable alignment include:

              • < 20° anterior angulation

              • < 30° varus/valgus angulation

              • < 30° of rotational malalignment

              • < 3 cm shortening

          • relative indications

            • community ambulator

            • noncompliant patients

        • contraindications

          • absolute

            • severe soft tissue injury or bone loss

            • vascular injury requiring repair

            • brachial plexus injury

          • relative

            • see relative operative indications section

            • worsening nerve dysfunction

            • radial nerve palsy is NOT a contraindication to functional bracing

        • outcomes

          • averageunion rate of 93.5% (77-100%)

            • increased risk withproximal third (54%), and oblique or spiral fracturepatterns (23%)

          • average time to union of 10.7 weeks (6.5-22 weeks)

          • average malunion rate of 12%

          • range of motion

            • 38-45% of patients lose externalrange of motion (5-45 degrees)

            • 88.6% of patients lose lessthan 10 degrees of shoulder motion

            • 92% lose less than 10degrees of elbow motion

          • varus angulation is common but rarely has functional or cosmetic sequelae

      • damage control orthopaedics (DCO)

        • closed humerus fractures, including low velocity GSW, should be initially managed with a splint or sling

        • type of fixation after trauma should be directed by acceptable fracture alignment parameters, fracture pattern and associated injuries

    • Operative

      • external fixation (Exfix)

        • indications

          • high energy complex or comminuted fracture

          • open fracture

          • significant soft tissue or bony defect

          • floating elbow

          • hemodynamically unstable polytrauma

          • concomitant vascular injury

        • typically utilized asprovisional fixation until definitive treatment can be performed, but may beused definitely if needed

        • outcomes

          • average operative time of30 minutes (18 to 50 minutes)

          • 80% achieve good to excellentoutcomes

          • superficial pin track infectionrate of 12%

      • open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis

        • indications

          • absolute

            • open fracture

            • vascular injury requiring repair

            • brachial plexus injury

            • ipsilateral forearm fracture (floating elbow)

            • compartment syndrome

            • periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures at the tip of the stem

            • inability to maintain satisfactory reduction closed

            • progressive nerve deficit after closed manipulation

          • relative

            • bilateral humerus fracture

            • polytrauma or associated lower extremity fracture

              • allows early weight bearing through humerus

            • pathologic fractures

              • typically indicated if life expectancy is greater than 6 months

            • burns or soft tissue injury that precludes bracing

            • fracture characteristics

              • distraction at fracture site

              • segmental fractures

              • short oblique or transverse fracture pattern

                • OTA type A

              • intraarticular extension

              • long oblique proximal humeral shaft fracture

            • large body habitus, obesity, or large breasts

            • radial nerve palsy

          • outcomes

            • significantly lower rates of nonunion and malunion versus nonoperativemanagement

              • average malunion rate of 1%

              • average union rate of 90-92%

            • average time to union of 11.9 weeks

      • intramedullary nailing (IMN)

        • indications

          • relative

            • pathologic fractures

            • segmental fractures

            • severe osteoporotic bone

            • overlying skin compromise limits open approach

            • polytrauma

        • outcomes

          • lower risk of infection(1.2%) than ORIF (5.4%)

          • no significant risk ofreoperation (average 11.6%) versus ORIF (average 7.6%)

          • no difference in rates ofnonunion with faster time to union (average 10 weeks) than ORIF (average 11.9weeks)

          • significantly fasteroperative time (average 61 minutes) than ORIF (average 88 minutes)

          • increased rate whencompared to plating (16-37%)

            • greater risk of shoulderimpingement postoperatively

            • functional shoulder outcomescores (ASES scores) not shown to be different between IMN and ORIF

  • Techniques

    • Coaptation Splint & Functional Bracing

      • coaptation splint or hanging arm cast

        • applied until swelling resolves

        • adequately applied splint will extend up to axilla and over shoulder

        • common deformities include varus and extension

          • valgus mold to counter varus displacement

      • functional bracing

        • extends from 2.5 cm distal to axilla to 2.5 cm proximal to humeral condyles

        • sling should not be used to allow for gravity-assisted fracture reduction

        • shoulder extension used for more proximal fractures

        • weekly radiographs for first 3 weeks to ensure maintenance of reduction

          • every 3-4 weeks after that

    • External Fixation

      • approaches

        • proximal pins

          • anterolateral surface of proximal humerus

          • mini-open approach with dissection down to bone to mitigate axillary nerve injury

        • distal pins

          • lateral aspect of distal fragment

          • requires mini-open approach with dissection down to bone to mitigate radial nerve injury

          • most distal pin is just proximal to olecranon fossa

          • visualize cortical surface prior to inserting pins

    • Open Reduction and Internal Fixation (ORIF)

      • approaches

        • anterior (brachialis split) approach to humerus

          • used for middle third shaft fractures

          • deep dissection through internervous plane of brachialis muscle

            • lateral fibers (radial n.) and medial fibers (musculocutaneous n.) in majority of patients (~80%)

        • anterolateral approach to humerus

          • used for proximal third to middle third shaft fractures

          • distal extension of the deltopectoral approach

          • performed in a supine orbeach chair position with arm abducted 45° to 60°

          • radial nerve identified between the brachialis and brachioradialis distally

            • protected proximally anddistally by the brachialis

            • brachioradialis willprotect the musculocutaneous nerve distally

          • cephalic vein and anterior humeral circumflex arteries may be encountered during the surgical approach

        • posterior approach to humerus

          • maybe performed eitherprone or in a lateral position

          • usedfor distal to middle third shaft fractures

            • can be extensile

            • allows for exposure from the olecranon fossa to the junction of the proximal and middle third of the humerus

          • triceps may either be split or elevated with a lateral paratricipital exposure

            • triceps split

              • incision through the commontendon of the triceps

              • allows for retraction ofthe lateral head of the triceps laterally and long head of the triceps medially

              • allows exposure to theradial nerve and profunda brachii artery within the spiral groove

                • lateral brachialcutaneous/posterior antebrachial cutaneous nerve serves as an anatomic landmarkleading to the radial nerve

              • benefits

                • avoids the need for ulnar nervedissection and mobilization

                • can allow for adequate exposureof the humeral shaft fracture

              • limitations

                • 55% of the humeral shaftcan be exposed without radial nerve mobilization

                • 76% of the humeral shaftcan be exposed with radial nerve mobilization

                • does not utilize a trueinter-nervous plane

                • limited proximal extensionof the incision

            • triceps sparing or “paratricipital”

              • utilizes lateral and medial windows without disrupting the extensormechanism

              • lateral brachial cutaneous/posterior antebrachial cutaneous nerve serves as an anatomic landmark leading to the radial nerve during a paratricipital approach

              • lateral window

                • lateral head of the tricep and intermuscular septum

                • allows for identification of the radial nerve, and posteriorantebrachial cutaneous nerve

              • medial window

                • mobilization of the ulnar nerve followed by dissection to the medialintermuscular septum border posteriorly

              • benefits

                • minimizes injury to the triceps

                • improved postoperative functional measures

                • decreased risk of denervation of the triceps and anconeus

                • allows for exposure of ~94% of the humeral shaft through the lateralwindow

              • limitations

                • requires dissection and mobilization of the ulnar nerve for the medialwindow

            • lateral approach

              • extends from the insertion of the deltoid to the lateral epicondyle

              • allows for exposure of the distal two-thirds of the humerus

              • the interval is between the lateral intermuscular septum and the triceps

              • radial nerve identified proximal to the deep head of the triceps andmobilized by releasing the lateral intermuscular septum

              • higher risk of iatrogenic radial nerve injury

            • medial approach

              • primarily used to access the brachial artery, median nerve, and ulnarnerve

              • rarely used for fracture fixation

              • incision extends from the proximal medial margin of the biceps distally tothe medial epicondyle

                • ulnar nerve is retracted posteromedially

                • median nerve and brachial artery retracted anterolaterally

            • minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis

              • proximal and distal incisions performed through an anterolateralapproach followed by the creation of an extraperiosteal tunnel

              • theplate is tunneled and positioned under fluoroscopic guidance

              • Minimizes surgical dissection, but increases the risk of radial nerve injurydue to lack of direct visualization

      • techniques

        • plate osteosynthesiscommonly with narrow or broad, 3.5mm or 4.5mm dynamic compression plate orlimited contact dynamic compression plate

          • dynamic compression plateallows for staggered screws

          • narrow dynamic compressionplate better accommodates patients with a more narrow humerus

          • limited contact dynamiccompression plate provide benefit of being easier to contour, decreased stressshielding, and preservation of periosteal blood supply

        • relationship of plate and radial nerve must be respected to preventinadvertent nerve injury

        • absolute stability with lag screw or compression plating in simple patterns

        • apply plate in bridging mode in the presence of significant comminution

        • may require the incorporation of condyles or dual plating in distalfractures

        • bony defects up to 3cm can be dealt with via shortening, but larger defects(>3cm) may require grafting

      • postoperative

        • full crutch weight bearing shown to have no effect on union

    • Intramedullary Nailing (IMN)

      • techniques

        • can be done antegrade or retrograde

          • antegrade

            • performed supine

            • 3cm incision over theanterolateral edge of the acromion down the deltoid, which is then split toidentify the rotator cuff

            • entry site for the nailthrough the supraspinatus fibers as medial as possible to apex of the humeralhead

          • retrograde

            • performed prone or lateral through a posteriorincision over the posterior supracondylar cortex

          • avoid reaming across thefracture site to prevent radial nerve injury

      • complication

        • nonunion

          • nonunion rates not shown to be different between IMN and plating in recent meta-analyses

          • IM nailing associated with higher total complication rates

        • nerve injury

          • radial nerve

            • at risk with a lateral to medial distal locking screw

              • while controversial, a recent meta-analysis showed no difference between the incidence of radial nerve palsy between IMN and plating

          • musculocutaneous nerve

            • at risk with an anterior-posterior locking screw

          • axillary nerve

            • at risk with proximal locking screws in antegrade nails

            • anterior and posterior humeral circumflex vessels are also at risk

        • shoulder pain

          • increased rate when compared to plating (16-37%)

          • functional shoulder outcome scores (ASES scores) not shown to be different between IMN and ORIF

          • supraspinatus at risk with antegrade nails

            • due to the avascular nature of the supraspinatus tendon atit* insertion site near the greater tuberosity

              • entry portal should be created near the musculotendinous junction

            • entry portal should not be greater than 1cm

      • postoperative

        • full weight bearing allowed and had no effect on union

  • Complications

    • Nonunion

      • no callous on radiograph and gross motion at the fracture site at 6 weeks from injury has a 90-100% PPV of going on to nonunion in closed humeral shaft fractures

        • 82% sensitivity and 99% specificity

      • radiographic union score for humeral fracture (RUSHU)

        • 1 score per cortex on radiographs obtained 6-weeks from injury

          • 1: absent callus

          • 2: present, nonbridging callus

          • 3: present, bridging callus

        • score ≥8 - 86% NPV for nonunion

        • score <8 - 65% PPV

      • risk factors

        • humeral shaft fractures treated nonoperatively dependent on fracture pattern

          • OTA type A (15.4 to 29%) > type B (4%) >type C (0%) fractures

      • No significant difference in the rate of nonunion following open reductionwith internal fixation versus intramedullary nailing

      • treatment

        • higher rates of union with plate fixation and autologous bone grafting than with exchange intramedullary nailing

        • management predicated by type of nonunion (atrophic, hypertrophic, infected)

          • atrophic nonunion

            • debridement and curretage of non-viable fragment and fibrous scar at fracture site

            • intramedullary nail revision with reaming and exchange to larger nail

              • ream up by at least 1mm to improve biomechanical stability

            • compression plating with bone grafting

              • iliac crest graft, femoral autograft from REA (reamer/irrigator/aspirator)

              • bone graft subsititue

          • hypertrophic nonunion

            • intramedullary nailing with exchange for larger nail

            • locked angle plating

    • Malunion

      • varus angulation is common but rarely has functional or cosmetic sequelae

      • risk factors

        • transverse fracture patterns

    • Radial nerve palsy

      • incidence

        • overall incidence of 12.3% ( 8-15%)

        • increased incidence distal one-third fractures (22%)

        • neuropraxia most common injury in closed fractures and neurotomesis in open fractures

        • iatrogenic radial nerve palsy is most common following ORIF via a lateral approach (20%) or posterior approach (11%)

        • spontaneous recovery found at an average of 7 weeks, with full recovery at an average of 6 months

      • risk factors

        • fracture location

          • distal third (56.9%) > middle third (41.5%) > proximal third (1.5%)

        • fracture type

          • transverse (21.2%) > spiral (19.8%) > oblique (8.4%) > comminuted (6.8%)

        • open fracture

      • treatment

        • observation

          • indicated as initial treatment in closed humerus fractures

          • approximately 77.2% with spontaneous radial nerve recovery

            • 85-90% of these will recovery within the first 3 months

          • obtain NCS/EMG at ~2 months

            • useful to determine the extent of nerve damage, baseline of function, and to monitor recovery

          • wrist extension in radial deviation is expected to be regained first

          • brachioradialis first to recover, extensor indicis is the last

        • surgical exploration

          • indications

            • open fracture with radial nerve palsy (likely neurotomesis injury to the radial nerve)

            • closed fracture that fails to improve over ~4-6 months

            • fibrillations (denervation) seen on EMG

          • may require debridement or removal or incarcerated fragments, nerve grafting, or nerve transfers at the time of exploration

          • outcomes

            • radial nerve appearance at the time of exploration

              • nerve in continuity (62.7%)

              • lacerated (26.8%)

              • incarcerated within the fracture site (10.5%)

            • timing of exploration

              • early exploration (within three weeks of injury)

                • recovery rate ~90%

              • late exploration (eight weeks or more out from injury)

                • recovery rate ~68%

        • tendon transfers

          • indications

            • persistent radial nerve palsy - optimal timing debated

            • wrist extension: PT to ECRB

            • finger extension: FCR/FCU to EDC

            • thumb extension: PL to EPL

      • outcomes

        • overall recovery rate of 88.6%

          • primary nerve palsy recovery rate - 88.2%

          • iatrogenic/secondary nerve palsy recovery rate - 93.9%

        • predictable recovery pattern

          • brachioradialisand extensor carpi radialis longus are first to recover

          • extensorpollicus longus and extensor indicis proprus are last to recover

Technique Guide Humerus Shaft Fracture ORIF with Anterolateral Approach Orthobullets Team Trauma - Humeral Shaft Fractures
Technique Guide Humerus Shaft ORIF with Posterior Approach Orthobullets Team Trauma - Humeral Shaft Fractures

Card

1 of 58

Question

1 of 54

Sort by

EF L1\L2 Evidence Date
3 3 Rockwood And Green’s: Fractures in Adults Rockwood and Green's Fractures in Adults. Chapter 36: HUMERAL SHAFT FRACTURES Christos Garnavos Trauma - Humeral Shaft Fractures Christos Garnavos,
Trauma | Humeral Shaft Fractures Trauma - Humeral Shaft Fractures 23:45 min 10/16/2019 2181 plays 4.9 (9)

Login

Please Login to add comment

of images

Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (21)

Private Note
Humeral Shaft Fractures - Trauma (2024)

References

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Roderick King

Last Updated:

Views: 6164

Rating: 4 / 5 (51 voted)

Reviews: 90% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Roderick King

Birthday: 1997-10-09

Address: 3782 Madge Knoll, East Dudley, MA 63913

Phone: +2521695290067

Job: Customer Sales Coordinator

Hobby: Gunsmithing, Embroidery, Parkour, Kitesurfing, Rock climbing, Sand art, Beekeeping

Introduction: My name is Roderick King, I am a cute, splendid, excited, perfect, gentle, funny, vivacious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.