View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
�������� � 21 � � 27 � 20170928 �
Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research September 28, 2017 Vol.21, No.27
�
P.O. Box 10002, Shenyang 110180 www.CRTER.org
4324
�������
www.CRTER.org
������1990���
��� �����
2017 ��������
�����������
��� !"#$%
&'()*+,-���
����./01�2�
34�� 116021
�����:R318
���:A
����:2095-4344
(2017)27-04324-06
�����2017-06-22
Li Yun-peng, Master,
Physician, Department of
Traumatic Orthopedics, the
Second Hospital of Dalian
Medical University, Dalian
116021, Liaoning Province,
China
Corresponding author:
Zhao Wen-zhi, Department of
Traumatic Orthopedics, the
Second Hospital of Dalian
Medical University, Dalian
116021, Liaoning Province,
China
�
��
�
����������� ��������C���
�
��
�
�������(������������ �������� 116021)�
������������. ��� ����������������C���[J].� !"#$%&�2017�21(27):4324-4329.
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.27.011 ORCID: 0000-0003-1718-0194(���)
�������
�����
�� ����� ����������������������� !"�#$%&'()
*!"�#$%&'+�,-$%!"./012�34-05�6789:;<=�>?-$%!"./
012�-0@ �2A$%BC)*(
���� C�������./0120D����EF�GH/0120DIJKL/0M N0D
�OPQREF�STEU AVBVCWF(CFUXYZ[�0D�C1U/0\]Z[5^_0D�`a
2U^_0D>C2U/0\]Z[5^_0D�`a2UOP0D>C3UZ[5V`a2OP0D(
��
���/0120D�UOPbcdefghi�TjkL��l�mn�opqrstuvw0DxyI
z{|��}~+��|��(
�����E��p�3st#)*��$%����j/012 CF0D���(
���S����� 32�/012 CF0D����qrstEU 2��?0���0st� 18��/W
�����st� 14���� 2���|��V� ¡¢V0DEF£�5¤¥J¦§b¨©(����q
rª«Vr+¬®V¯°ª«V±�ª«Lr3²³´µL¶·¸�·¹º»¼ '½�r3 1�3�6 ¾
¿V1 �L 1 �À²³(����ÁÂLÃÄÅÁÂÆÇ0D±�ª«L¶·¸�r3 1 �È� Mayo ÉE
ÉÊ�Z[´µ(
������Ë?0���0st���Ì/W�����st�qrª«xÍVr+¬xÎ(P < 0.05)�
Ï�Ð3�Z[ÑÒLÓÔÕRxB(P < 0.05)�r3 1��Z[´µxz(P < 0.05)>Ö�st|0D±�
ª«£�5¤¥J¦§b¨©(P > 0.05)>×Ø ��3�pstÙµÚÛ¦Ü/0120DZ[5�#)*
$%µÝI���/012 CF0D(/W�����str+� xÞ�?0���0stÐ3ßIxÛ
��Z[´µNxà�¶·¸(
!"�
�'(�)*�(�)*������*+,� *���
#�"�
����*���-*!"#$
Perpendicular double-locking plating system for the internal fixation of type C distal
humerus fractures through two kinds of postcubital approaches
Li Yun-peng, Zhao Wen-zhi (Department of Traumatic Orthopedics, the Second Hospital of Dalian Medical
University, Dalian 116021, Liaoning Province, China)
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Distal humerus fracture is often comminuted, and is difficult to receive reduction and fixation
due to its special anatomical structure. Choosing which surgical approach is still a controversy.
OBJECTIVE: To compare and analyze the curative efficacy of the perpendicular double-locking plating system
for the internal fixation of type C distal humerus fractures through two kinds of postcubital approaches.
METHODS: Thirty-two cases of type C distal humerus fractures were enrolled and divided into groups A
(osteotomy of olecranon approach) and B (tricep anconeus flap approach). There was no significant difference in
the baseline data between two groups. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, healing time,
���������� C ������
��������
����������������
��������
��
����
�� C���
������
���
� �������
� �������� �������
� �������
����
��������
�����
��
�����
��������
����
�����
����������
������
��
�
�� !"#$
�� !"#$�� !"#$
�� !"#$�
��
�
�����. ����� ������������� C ���
ISSN 2095-4344 CN 21-1581/R CODEN: ZLKHAH
4325
www.CRTER.org
postoperative follow-up and complications were recorded and analyzed. The patients were followed up at 2 weeks, 1, 3,
6, 12, and 18 months. The healing time and complications were recorded according to radiographs and physical
examinations. The Mayo Elbow Performance Score was used to determine the elbow function at 1 year postoperatively.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) The group A had a longer operation time and more intraoperative blood loss than
those in the group B (P < 0.05), but showed a better elbow flexion and extension degrees, and higher Mayo Elbow
Performance Score at 1 year postoperatively (P < 0.05). (2) There was no significant difference in the healing time
between two groups (P > 0.05). (3) These results suggest that the articular surface of the distal humerus fracture is
displayed well through two approaches, and the perpendicular double-locking plating system for the internal fixation of
type C distal humerus fractures is rational. Noticeably, the tricep anconeus flap approach dose little damage to the
muscle, while the osteotomy of olecranon approach obtains better elbow function and less complications.
Subject headings: Humeral Fractures; Internal Fixators; Tissue Engineering
Cite this article: Li YP, Zhao WZ. Perpendicular double-locking plating system for the internal fixation of type C distal
humerus fractures through two kinds of postcubital approaches. Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu.
2017;21(27):4324-4329.
0 �� Introduction
���������������� ����
�������� ������� �!" �#$�
%&'"()���*+ ,-.��"/012��
� 34567-8()
[1-2]
9:;������<:;�
����23.69% <=>���1.04%
[3]
9
?@AB�CDEFGH%FIJKLMHN2014
O10PQ2016O3PR(S-8()TU�VW����
�CX��YZ[\32] ^_`abcdefghij
k�lmn��()����CX���)o9
1���������Subjects and methods
1.1 �� AB�Sp&qS Vr^stuvw9
1.2 ����� x2014O10PQ2016O3PyFGH
%FIJKLMHN#$�%z{9
1.3 � ?&|�}�����n��~�����
��������� �~�n���k���Sk��
�m�����q�����:9������n���
|�}� ¡¢£¤¥~��¦§¨©����98&ª
����e«f ¬0�����}9-8�}�|�
n��®¯®°±�¡²³ ´µ�¶2�·¸¹��¶
��º» µ�¶2��¼½¾� y;¿ÀÁ¸¹�
ÀÁÃÄÅÆÇÈ _ÉÊË�SÊÌÍ ¶��º»�
�fοn���À¾ÏÐÑÒÓ9
1.4 �
����ÔÕpÖ×ØÙ����Ú²��(AO 13-C
X)ÛÜÝ$Þ¿yÝ$4d×Øßàá�ÛâOãä 18
å9
����ÔÕæçSèé�êë��ÛÜ�d×Ø-
8êìÛâ�íîïðñòó$9
ô²õöTU�VW������CX��YZ[\
32] ́ &÷}������fg(A�)18] �ø�ùú
ùûfg(B�)14]9A�YZüýþ11] �7]ÛOã
18�59å �±34åÛAO`XC1X8] C2X4]ÛC3X
6]9B�YZüýþ8] �4]ÛOã19�63å �±37
åÛAO`XC1X6] C2X5] C3X3]92�YZyO
ãSó$r�S��`XÍ��������(P >
0.05) µ��_�(�
��
�1)9
1.5 ���
1.5.1 84ö �-8�. 84±�YZ{d×Øá
Ö�X���CTî��� -8�$e4 h05 d �±�
2.4 d9
2�YZ±÷}Ö�� YÞ«x�4 =>����
����-8 ±÷}deá&��(�
��
�1) -8����
n��e�ñò� �T!"�ñò(�
��
�2)9A�Ôy�
�#$2 cm %���&'(ij���{ij�Z)*+
,��(�
��
�3) ª�ø�ù��-+¬./�0è ��
��9B�Ô���ø�ù�´1e y�ø�ù1
z{úû�� úû�#��x/� 23�x�� �
�45&67,:89S:;�1<û =e.�0
> y���á&'{�è���< ����Ò�9
����?s)@×Ø�e���+AB(�
��
�4) CD��
EF @%��G�� HeI?%����J
Kz{ 2�-8±÷}ijhlm�������� �
�����÷}LM lN��(�
��
�5)9
1.5.2 8e%ë 2�YZ8e�O÷} P�QRST
�UVSWX¦YZ[���\ 8e24 hnZ[�È}
]Ä^ 8e48 hnCD_`abc_`ð98eL2d¬
�eA�YZ{d×ØfSÂgßàhi(�
��
�6�
��
�7)9B�h
k�lmn��Z jd30°�40°�klmÙ�� 3 ne
ocklmÙ��e{d×Øßàpq92�ßàhif
grg�f stuCPMrÂgrg9
� 1 �������
Table 1 General information of the patients in the two groups
���A ��������� B �������������
�� n ����(�) �/�(n) AO �� C1/C2/C3(n)
A � 18 34 11/7 8/4/6
B � 14 37 8/4 6/5/3
P > 0.05 > 0.05 > 0.05
�����. ����� ������������� C ���
P.O. Box 10002, Shenyang 110180 www.CRTER.org
4326
www.CRTER.org
1.6 ������ ����������� �
������������������������
� !"#$1$3$6%&1'�1'(��)*+,-
./�012./34��������$��1'56
Mayo7879:;<��)
������=>?@ABC�DEFGCHI?@A
JKLMHNXOPQR��STUV�WX��PYZ)
���Mayo� ��=[81008$\]^C45
8$_M��208$`ab108$cKLM258)de90
8fg$he75�898$e60�748$ijk608)
1.7 ��� 56SPSS 13.0"#lm8n$# o
p56qrstt .u)#vop56�
2
.u$.uwx
α=0.05)
2������Results
2.1 � ���� yzEbS{$|�}~�x��
���C������#32�$8e2�$A����)8
������
��
�8)
2.2 ���� 32��������$����7�24%
&)��T�������������� ��
�3 ����V���
Figure 3 V-shape
osteotomy at the distal
humerus
� 1 ���
Figure 1 Position and incision
nerve
� 2 �������
Figure 2 Separating and protecting
ulnar nerve
� 4 �����
Figure 4 Reduction of
the humeral trochlea
� 5 �������
Figure 5 X-ray images preoperatively and
postoperatively
� 6 ���� 2 !"
Figure 6 Function of a patient at 2
weeks postoperatively
� 7 ���� 4 !"
Figure 7 Function of a patient at 4
weeks postoperatively
�����. ����� ������������� C ���
ISSN 2095-4344 CN 21-1581/R CODEN: ZLKHAH
4327
www.CRTER.org
��������;<��;<����1'��
Mayo78 !34(�
��
�2))���R$A����B���
���������(P < 0.05)$����:;<��
��� ¡�¢(P < 0.05)$��1':;<��£¤�d
(P < 0.05))2���¥������¦§¨iJA�©b
zª(P > 0.05))
2.3 ����� «¬~�Tv����®����
�$A���$1���¯°�±²l�³´µ$¶·¸
�¹!��H��2������®º»b¼½¾�¿$À
T��Á¡JÂ�Ã�¿���1�)ÄB���$º»
b¼½¾ÅÆJÂ�Ã:;<ÇÈÉT1�)56«¬
~�����A��������$34����
��
�3)
3������Discussion�
����ËÌÍÎÏÌÍÐÑÒ��ÓÔ$ÕÖ×Î
ØÙ×�Ú¥Û�����ÜÝ�Þß�à$á�âã
äå æ):;<çèéêëìí�������¤Â�
Ëîaï¡$��~ÎËîað�ñòóôõö÷øù
ú${û��ü�ýÎËîañòþf�ìh��îa�
¤Â$� ������$�¢�¡�£¤;<��)
3.1 ��� ��¯$¾¼�ÕÖ��~� �
�����~� ��$���������
��(P < 0.05))�ùþ��¼�ÕÖ��~¥����
k��ÕÖ���Ëîa$ëìí����$��¨��
å������â�ëì)��}~"#�¼�ÕÖ��
~�����:;<����� ¡�¢(P < 0.05)$�
ùþ��¼�ÕÖ��~��Ê����îa$þf�
�����HÄ�å�����~������Ïîa
v�$ !���!�����:;<LM¡���"#
$)
¥�����§¨$ù���%$A&'«�()�
�$����fe$«~¥l�³´µº»b¼½¾
ÅƧ¨óAiJb$��ù�å�����~��
l�³*+�¼�ÕÖ��~,$-JÂ�Ã��þ�
bÝó�¢$Ä�����îa$Û�:;<ÇÈþ�b
��¼�ÕÖ��~.$���� /012)
3.2 ������ 312Ëîa� �����$
¢�v��������T4�ñò��� �$���
T5¬����ñò67� =8T9Â���Ê�:
#;<����T=>?@A����)®T,-B+
¯$ñò��� �������C��� dJ
[4]
)
3\D�k75Efg���������«FåG
12¯$�k�����C��� $¢HT3I�JK
�ö/%ïfL#���(Ý�JK=2.8$95%MNO�=
1.78�4.4)
[5-6]
)À/F�k273�������47�C��
���åGB+�¯$¢HT6IHP����Ê��
(Ý�JK=5.8$95%MNO�=2.3�14.7)$�T¢H4I�
JK�����QR��(�JK=4.4$95%MNO�=
1.6�12)
[7]
)
[�ST$�kþf:#;<���$���U�V
ñ�� §&$���óWX������)Ä�kA&
:#;<���$ó�:60°��îaYZå�$ !��
�[¡�����)
3.3 !"#$� %%{\g]$ËÌ~ÏÌ~^
Ì~�Ì~�_�~�þf6SS{�����
�$��3,-S]$3`/~þfab�îa�
���ËÏÌÍ�cT�Ì~)d^K6��Ì~\
]=¼�ÕÖ��~�å���¿�~�å��
ef~�å��«Ì~�å���ghêij~
�å���:��~�å��kç~�å��
������ C����� 32
����� ��� 2��
A� 18�������
����������
!�"#�
B� 14���$%&'&
(���������
!�"#�
A� 18�)*+,-�
./�0�123�
B� 14�)*+,-�.
/�0�123�
� 8 #$�� $%&�
Figure 8 Flow chart of the patient assignment
' 2 #$���()*+,-.
Table 2 Intraoperative and follow-up data of the patients in the two
groups
456A������������B���$%&'&(����
78 A�(n=18) B�(n=14) P
9:(x
�
±s�min) 115.86±15.45 91.05±13.65 < 0.05
;<=>(x
�
±s�mL) 221.64±33.62 122.62±20.14 < 0.05
?@AB9:(d) 7.15 7.02 > 0.05
��CD9:(x
�
±s�E) 12.01±2.32 11.82±1.96 > 0.05
F 1GHIJKL(x
�
±s�°) 100.6±12.1 89.2±11.3 < 0.05
F 1GHIMNL(x
�
±s�°) 11.4±9.1 16.4±10.8 < 0.05
F 1GMayoO�(x
�
±s��) 84.7±13.4 75.6±13.2 < 0.05
' 3 #$���/0)*12 (n)
Table 3 Postoperative complications of the patients in the two groups
456A������������B���$%&'&(����
PQR A�(n=18) B�(n=14)
4STU 1 0
VWX�YZ[\ 2 1
�� CD 0 0
�� CD 0 0
]^�_ 1 1
`HIab 0 1
cd 4 3
�����. ����� ������������� C ���
P.O. Box 10002, Shenyang 110180 www.CRTER.org
4328
www.CRTER.org
���
[8]
������� �����������
������������������������
�! "#$%&�'()�*+,-./012(��
�3��45���6789:;<=>(?@AB
����"#$��(CD�EFGH��I(JKG
H��I?-.LMN(OPQRST;UVWX
[9]
��
��������YZ�[\]^�_`(;ab[c
�def�^�;<=>:g���h! "#$%&
;ijk(l[7:Cm��QRn;Vopqrst(
uvwLMN\]xyz;i({|x}~)�ab��
��������B��(JK;0+,/012�
�VEF"#��
[10]
��
Wilkinson:���k��������%&"#$
�k�(���������57%(��������
����45%(���������35%
[11]
�Dakour��
[12]
����8�v����%&"#$�k�(���
�����26%(������������37%(��
�������52%�� ���������%&¡'(
6�¢£QR*09:LMN¤¥¦§��¨©ª«¬u
�;�J®¯(°O±R²³¢£QR´µ¶����
��
[13]
�·¸)�/0�¹º»( "#¼�½¾§¿À
½¾§MayoÁk(��������¹������Y
Ã(·q-DESHÁk�R^Ä
[14]
�
�g65ÅÆ�¢£��! ÇÈd��QR(O±
RÉ�ÊË��stLMN)�|ÌÍ/0ÎÏ(ÐÑ
ÒÓÔÕ(Ö×µ¶Ø "#ÙÚ)ºÛÜ "#/0
[15]
�
3.4 �����������:B����ÝÞ "
#��x(��B7ßÆàáâã(äå��æZ(
)nçèé��Bêëìº(JíÆî�ïÆðñ(ò;
9:ó³(67>Tô���7õ?é��Bö÷��B
øL(uRµ¶ù²��Bøé��Bút(ûü�ý9
:¡þó³
[16]
�T���(é��B�Ù*��Ö��
�®Ò�ù��§�� ����Ö�EF��B�
�¯�®Ò(67��ýO±RÉ�(��QR:µ¶
~)=�(;9:���k�����B��¯�(�)
n��B�ú7�O��
[17]
��
3.5 ����������ûü�LMN� |�|!(
µ¶LMN� x?�"#��L�$Nd���$N
d�%&|µ¶'()*¬+,MN(·F£D|µ¶,
-.ËMN�,-.Ë/�01`2-�32-MN(`
2-401L�u��2-�Y�2-532-016�
32-�7.32-��
�gF£D��! Cm��(`8L�u��2
-9:9:;i§3;<n§3;=>�?%@A(·K
UV®Ò�-BC(��ûü�ò{D3�^�(�
�|EMN� 01FYm2-§6�32-�7.
32-�Ym2-Ö[G¬;'§h��kHï�§I�
$+,J
[18]
(KKLd¡32-OMN
[19]
(ûü¡D3�
678OOÒ��É�(Y2-POQRSZ(*ÆT
��U�(VgWXkm��! ��(·[YDZ
,@A8�O[\?%
[20]
�
����MN� ý76��7.32-.Ë(
��2-4]OYA�6�32-^�2-3öÙg�
�! ����$(_`a;b]5��2-3ö
Ùg��! L��c�
[21]
�7.32-��2-3ö
Ùg��! L�dhce$([! 0à��Lh5
·^�2-3öÙg��d��([! ;fá��g
�
[22]
�:]�LMN� $Nd�(7.32-MN�
9g6�32-MN(�R¹Y�2-$N
[23]
�
3.6 ���������! ��V®ÒJ®¯¡|(/
�01 "#�¦Xhu�i§��d�j§Ãt��§
"#k¾l�LMN¤mn§o�d"#j§�����
;§�pqrs¬t§��«¬Îϧu�«¬§vw§
��B�x§¿¼ �;yz�{��QR)�J®¯¡
|}[24-28]~�(*0�)n�ë�q¡D§���¡D§
)����������Ãt���+,/012^
"��
3.7 ���
��������F�¹���~)��36�2
-ÝÞ��! Cm��5¹¡�����ÝÞe��/
�J®¯�@AF~)J��AOÒôF(ûüB��
�D�'*0�ÐÑ~)Þn5÷#d��(!{Õ;i
þ(��xz;i��
�� F����������������MN
��! Cm���0�`��e����������
0i~jk%&"#$(op¹¡' "#/05�6
�32-MN��! Cm��*�`$NMN(�<
+,/012��5 ¡')�n��OÒ�DB�
�QR¢¸dO"�
����3���������� ����������
�����
����3������� �!"#$%&'(�
��3)*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?
@A-./#$BCDE��!/FGHIJKLM�!NOP4Q
RS)*-.TUVW;(STROBEVW)�XH0,/YZ[A�\
]^_`aXb�cdePfghijk/lmnopqrs�t
uv�
���3�!wxlyz{ CNKI|}~������� 3
����
���3�!z��������]�����23g���
���
����3����?�-.<FG/���w�/���_�
������� �/¡¢£¤¥�¦§¨�©ª�«¬®�
¯gy°±�$²³´µ¥e¶<·¸� ¹º»��
���3�!wxl¼�yH½A��¾¿@opPx¿#$
ÀÁ�
������3ÂÃÄÅÆÇÈÉ�!��!wxl¼�yH½
�����. ����� ������������� C ���
ISSN 2095-4344 CN 21-1581/R CODEN: ZLKHAH
4329
www.CRTER.org
A��¾¿@opPx¿#$ÀÁ�Ê4rË�¶Ì ÀÁ;qp
ÍÎÏÐÑSÒÓÎ#�jÔ�¶3.0vÕÖ�c3C×Ó/sØn�
ÙÌÚ@ÛÏÐÑSÜ/8�¡��ÝIJ¥Þß<àá��âÙÌ
�ãÓäåæ¥nç¥èé¥êë¥ìí¥�î¥ïðñ¹ò���
ó_ôõöî×�Ó�÷ø/ùú�û\ü�ã3ýÓþ�
4 ���� References
[1] ��,���. ������ ��[J]. ������,
2009,47(12):903-905.
[2] Gupta R, Khanchandani P. Intercondylar fractures of the distal
humerus in adults: a critical analysis of 55 cases. Injury. 2002;
33(6):511-215.
[3] ���,���,���,�. 2008� 2012�!"#�$%&'
#()*��+,��-./%01[J], ��23����,
2016, 18(3):237-240.
[4] Nauth A, Mckee MD, Ristevski B, et al. Distal humeral
fractures in adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(7):
686-700.
[5] Srinivasan K, Agarwal M, Matthews SJ, et al. Fractures of the
distal humerus in the elderly: is internal fixation the treatment
of choice? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;434:222-230.
[6] Zagorski JB, Jennings JJ, Burkhalter WE, et al. Comminuted
intraarticular fractures of the distal humeral condyles. Surgical
VS. nonsurgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;202:
197-204.
[7] Robinson CM, Hill RM, Jacobs N, et al. Adult distal humeral
metaphyseal fractures: epidemiology and results of treatment.
J Orthop Trauma.2003;17:38-47.
[8] 456,789:;<=. ��+,��>?@ABCD��
[J]. #%EFGHI, 2015,28(1):30-32.
[9] Bégué T. Articular fractures of the distal humerus. Orthop
Traumatol Surg Res. 2014;100(1):55-63.
[10] Voloshin I, Schippert DW, Kakar S, et al. Complications of
total elbow replacement: a systematic review. J Shoulder
Elbow Surg. 2011;20(1):158-168.
[11] Mckee M. Posterior surgical approaches to the elbow: a
comparative anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;
10(4):380-382.
[12] Dakouré PW, Ndiaye A, Ndoye JM, et al. Posterior surgical
approaches to the elbow: a simple method of comparison of
the articular exposure. Surg Radiol Anat. 2007;29(8):671-674.
[13] Zhang C, Zhong B, Luo CF. Comparing approaches to expose
type C fractures of the distal humerus for ORIF in elderly
patients: six years clinical experience with both the
triceps-sparing approach and olecranon osteotomy. Arch
Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134(6):803-811.
[14] Elmadag M, Erdil M, Bilsel K, et al. The olecranon osteotomy
provides better outcome than the triceps-lifting approach for
the treatment of distal humerus fractures. Eur J Orthop Surg
Traumatol. 2014;24(1):43-50.
[15] Obert L, Ferrier M, Jacquot A, et al. Distal humerus fractures
in patients over 65: Complications. Orthop Traumatol Surg
Res. 2013;99(8):909-913.
[16] Ducrot G, Ehlinger M, Adam P, et al. Complex fractures of the
distal humerus in the elderly: is primary total elbow
arthroplasty a valid treatment alternative? A series of 20
cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2013;99(1):10-20.
[17] Chen RC, Harris DJ, Leduc S, et al. Is ulnar nerve
transposition beneficial during open reduction internal fixation
of distal humerus fractures? J Orthop Trauma. 2010;24(7):
391-394.
[18] Helfet DL, Hotchkiss RN. Internal fixation of the distal
humerus: a biomechanical comparison of methods. J Orthop
Trauma. 1990;4(3):260-264.
[19] Schemitsch EH, Tencer AF, Henley MB. Biomechanical
evaluation of methods of internal fixation of the distal humerus.
J Orthop Trauma. 1994;8(6):468-475.
[20] Saragaglia D, Rouchy RC, Mercier N. Fractures of the distal
humerus operated on using the Lambda® plate: report of 75
cases at 9.5 years follow-up. Orthop Traumatol Surge Res.
2013;99(6):707-712.
[21] Fornasiéri C, Staub C, Tourné Y, et al. [Biomechanical
comparative study of three types of osteosynthesis in the
treatment of supra and intercondylar fractures of the humerus
in adults]. Revue De Chirurgie Orthopédique Et Réparatrice
De Lappareil Moteur. 1997;83(3):237-242.
[22] Ring D, Jupiter JB. Fractures of the distal humerus.
Orthopedics. 1992;15(7):103-113.
[23] Sabalic S, Kodvanj J, Pavic A. Comparative study of three
models of extra-articular distal humerus fracture
osteosynthesis using the finite element method on an
osteoporotic computational model. Injury. 2013;44(44 Suppl
3):S56-S61.
[24] Mc Kee Md,Wilson TL.Functional outcome following surgical
treatment of intra-articular distal humeral fractures through a
posterior approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82-A(12):
1701-1707.
[25] Mc Kee MD,Kim J.Functional outcome after open
supracondylar fracture of the humerus.The effect of the
suigical approach. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(5):646-651.
[26] Pajarinen J,Bjorkenheim JM.Operative treatment of type C
intercondylar fractures of the distal humerus:results after a
mean follow-up of 2 years in series of 18 patients. J Shoulder
Elbow Surg. 2002;11(1):48-52.
[27] Gofton WT,Macdermid JC.Functional outcome of AO type C
diatal humeral fractures. J Hand Surg Am. 2003;28(2):
294-308.
[28] Soon JL,Chan BK. Surgical fixation of intra-articular fractures
of the distal humerus in asults. Injury. 2004;35(1):44-54.
Recommended