In cases of humeral diaphyseal fractures, is lateral approach surgery without radial nerve exploration as effective and safe as conventional surgery?/Humerus diyafiz kiriklarinda radial sinir diseksiyonu yapilmadan lateral yaklasim cerrahisi konvansiyonel cerrahi kadar etkili ve guvenli midir?
BACKGROUND: This study compares the efficacy and safety of lateral approach surgery with and without radial nerve dissection in treating humeral diaphyseal fractures. It assesses clinical, radiological, and complication outcomes, providing a description of the surgical methods and perioperative bene...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES 2024-06, Vol.30 (6), p.451 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | BACKGROUND: This study compares the efficacy and safety of lateral approach surgery with and without radial nerve dissection in treating humeral diaphyseal fractures. It assesses clinical, radiological, and complication outcomes, providing a description of the surgical methods and perioperative benefits. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 71 patients admitted between May 2015 and December 2022 who underwent lateral approach surgery for humeral diaphyseal fractures. Group 1, consisting of 34 patients without radial nerve dissection, and Group 2, comprising 37 patients with radial nerve dissection, were compared. Parameters such as age, gender, fracture side (right/ left), fracture type, follow-up time, surgical duration, blood loss, radiological and clinical evaluations (including Shoulder-Elbow range of motion [ROM] and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score [Q-DASH]), and complications were examined. Surgical techniques and outcomes were documented. RESULTS: Both groups exhibited comparable distributions in age, gender, fracture types, and follow-up times (p>0.05). Group 1 demonstrated significantly lower surgical duration and blood loss compared to Group 2 (p |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1306-696X |
DOI: | 10.14744/tjtes.2024.49500 |