The use of medial support screw was associated with axillary nerve injury after plate fixation of proximal humeral fracture using minimal invasive deltoid-splitting approach.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for axillary nerve injury after plate fixation of humeral fractures using minimal invasive deltoid-splitting approach. We hypothesized that the use of medial support screw (MSS) would be associated with the outcome of axillary nerve injury. METHODS: This study retrospectively evaluated consecutive 32 patients who underwent surgical treatments for proximal or midshaft humeral fractures. Of them, we included 26 patients who were examined by electromyography/nerve conduction (EMG/NCV) study at 3-4 weeks postoperatively. We excluded 6 patients because two of them were not compliant to EMG/NCV and the remaining two died due to unrelated medical illness. Outcome assessments included pain, functional scores, range of motion, and radiographic results. RESULTS: There were 8 male and 18 female patients with mean age of 67 ± 15 years. Mean duration of follow-up period was 31 ± 11 months. The mean time to EMG/NCS after surgery was 3.5 ± 0.6 weeks. EMG/NCS examinations revealed incomplete axillary nerve injury in 8 patients (31%) without complete nerve injury. Active forward elevation at 3 months postoperatively was significantly lower in patients with axillary nerve injury than in those without it (99° ± 12 and 123° ± 37, respectively, p = 0.047), although final clinical outcomes were not different. At surgery, MSS was used in 17 patients (65%), and 8 of them were associated with nerve injury. The use of MSS was only correlated with the outcome of axillary nerve injury, because the axillary nerve injury developed only in MSS group (p = 0.047). The MMT grade 4 in abduction strength was more common in patients with axillary nerve injury than in those without (p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Axillary nerve injury was a concern after plate fixation of proximal humeral fracture using minimal invasive deltoid-splitting approach. The use of medial support screw to improve the stability could increase a risk of axillary nerve injury when used with this approach.

Suture versus FasT-Fix all-inside meniscus repair at time of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

PURPOSE: To compare meniscal healing and functional outcomes after all-inside meniscal repair between sutures and meniscal fixation devices. METHODS: Sixty patients with a tear within the red-red or red-white zones of the posterior horn of the medial or lateral meniscus in conjunction with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear were included in this study. Meniscal repairs were performed with sutures in 35 patients and the FasT-Fix device (Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA) in 25 patients concomitantly with hamstring ACL reconstruction. Postoperative evaluations included Lysholm knee score, Tegner activity scale, Lachman and pivot-shift tests, and KT-1000 arthrometer (MEDmetric, San Diego, CA) testing. Follow-up magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans were obtained postoperatively for all patients to evaluate meniscal healing. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 47.2 months. In the suture group, 31 patients (86.1%) were asymptomatic and 4 (13.9%) were symptomatic. In the FasT-Fix group, 20 patients (80%) were asymptomatic and 5 (20%) were symptomatic. Postoperative functional evaluation and knee stability showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. Follow-up MRI showed that 26 menisci (74.3%) were healed, 3 menisci (8.6%) were partially healed, and 6 menisci (17.1%) were not healed in the suture group. In the FasT-Fix group, 15 menisci (64%) were healed, 7 menisci (24%) were partially healed, and 3 menisci (12%) were not healed. Follow-up MRI showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. In the FasT-Fix group, follow-up MRI showed a newly developed cyst posterior to the medial meniscus in 2 patients. A new tear anterior to the previous tear was found in 1 patient. In the suture group, follow-up MRI showed no cysts or new tears. CONCLUSIONS: All-inside meniscal repairs using either sutures or the FasT-Fix device showed satisfactory results in patients with concomitant hamstring ACL reconstruction. There was no statistically significant difference in meniscal healing evaluated by MRI and functional outcomes between the 2 techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.