Advantage of Minimally Invasive Lateral Approach Relative to Conventional Deltopectoral Approach for Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures

Source of support: Departmental sources Background: Despite the wide application of open reduction and internal fixation with locking plates for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures, the surgical invasive approach remains controversial. This study aimed to evalu-ate the pros and cons of the minimally invasive lateral approach for the treatment of proximal humeral frac-ture (PHF) in comparison with the deltopectoral approach. Material/Methods: All patients who sustained a PHF and received open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) surgery with lock-ing plate through either minimally invasive subacromial approach or conventional deltopectoral approach be-tween January 2008 and February 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the con-ventional group and min-group according to the surgical incision. Surgery-related information, postoperative radiography, complications, and shoulder functional measurement scores in a 2-year follow-up were collected and evaluated. Results: Ninety-one patients meeting the inclusion criteria were included in this study. We observed a significant differ-ence in both surgery time (81.8±18.3 vs. 91.0±18.4) (p=0.021) and blood loss (172±54.2 vs. 205±73.6) (p=0.016) between the min-group and conventional group. Compared to the conventional group, the min-group had sig-nificantly better Constant-Murley score and DASH score at early follow-up (p<0.05) and higher patients sat