Is MIPO as Safe and Effective as Conventional ORIF for Simple Fractures of Humerus Diaphysis?

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to compare radiological, functional, and clinical results of minimal invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) and conventional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) techniques in simple fractures of humerus diaphysis (AO/OTA 12A2b and AO/OTA 12A3b). Materials and Methods:We retrospectively evaluated 51 patients who were operated in our clinic for simple fractures of humerus diaphysis (AO/OTA 12A2b and AO/OTA 12A3b) between 2016 and 2021. Group A included patients treated by MIPO while Group B consisted of patients treated by conventional ORIF. Radiological outcomes were determined by fracture union, varus, and valgus malalignment. We evaluated clinical parameters by calculating deep tissue infection, injury to the radial nerve, and implant failure rates. We made the functional assessment by calculating QuickDASH, UCLASS, MEPI, and ROM. Results:We found no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding radiological outcomes except that varus angulation was determined to be higher in the MIPO group (p<0.001). We followed the obligation of the Helsinki Declaration in our research. The clinical and functional evaluations did not reveal any statistically significant difference between the two surgical techniques. Conclusion:MIPO technique for simple fractures of humerus diaphysis demonstrated similar radiological, functional, and clinical outcomes to conventional ORIF technique. Thus, we believe that MIPO technique may be as safe and effective as conventional ORIF technique.