Introduction: Proximal humerus fractures are common, however, there is no consensus on a decision-making algorithm for the therapeutic management of these fractures, the aim of this study is to evaluate and compare fu...Introduction: Proximal humerus fractures are common, however, there is no consensus on a decision-making algorithm for the therapeutic management of these fractures, the aim of this study is to evaluate and compare functional results between two surgical techniques and to deduce the satisfactory results of the Kapandji’s pinning which, compared to the screw plate, should keep its place in the therapeutic arsenal. Patients and Methods: It’s a retrospective study, including two groups: The first of 18 patients treated with palm-tree pinning using kapandji’s technique, the second of 16 patients treated with anatomical screw plate at the orthopedic trauma service of the Mohamed VI university hospital between July 2013 and July 2018. We compared the results of the two techniques by studying three parameters which are the healing time, the anatomical reduction, and the functional outcomes. The average age was 46 years, and the sex ratio (M/F) was 2.3. Results: The statistical analysis of functional and radiological results showed no significant difference between the two techniques, indeed the average healing time was 56.3 days in the group treated by screw plate and 55.2 days in the group treated by Kapandji’s pinning (p = 0.46), Constant’s score was 73.18 and 79.05 respectively (p = 0.27) and the average cephalodiaphyseal angle was 49.03° and 52.07°, respectively (p = 0.35). Discussion: This study has clearly shown, as reported in the literature, that there is no conclusive evidence to suggest superiority of os-teosynthesis by anatomical plate versus kapandji’s pinning. However, the simple achievement of pinning according to kapandji’s technique, the preservation of soft tissues and the low cost make us prefer this technique. Furthermore, despite the progress noted in the development of osteosynthesis means of the proximal humerus, percutaneous pinning should always keep its place.展开更多
文摘Introduction: Proximal humerus fractures are common, however, there is no consensus on a decision-making algorithm for the therapeutic management of these fractures, the aim of this study is to evaluate and compare functional results between two surgical techniques and to deduce the satisfactory results of the Kapandji’s pinning which, compared to the screw plate, should keep its place in the therapeutic arsenal. Patients and Methods: It’s a retrospective study, including two groups: The first of 18 patients treated with palm-tree pinning using kapandji’s technique, the second of 16 patients treated with anatomical screw plate at the orthopedic trauma service of the Mohamed VI university hospital between July 2013 and July 2018. We compared the results of the two techniques by studying three parameters which are the healing time, the anatomical reduction, and the functional outcomes. The average age was 46 years, and the sex ratio (M/F) was 2.3. Results: The statistical analysis of functional and radiological results showed no significant difference between the two techniques, indeed the average healing time was 56.3 days in the group treated by screw plate and 55.2 days in the group treated by Kapandji’s pinning (p = 0.46), Constant’s score was 73.18 and 79.05 respectively (p = 0.27) and the average cephalodiaphyseal angle was 49.03° and 52.07°, respectively (p = 0.35). Discussion: This study has clearly shown, as reported in the literature, that there is no conclusive evidence to suggest superiority of os-teosynthesis by anatomical plate versus kapandji’s pinning. However, the simple achievement of pinning according to kapandji’s technique, the preservation of soft tissues and the low cost make us prefer this technique. Furthermore, despite the progress noted in the development of osteosynthesis means of the proximal humerus, percutaneous pinning should always keep its place.
