Authors : Kaushal Anand, Kaushal Anand, Abhishek Gol, Abhishek Gol, Nirav Mungalpara, Nirav Mungalpara, Sagar Usdadia, Sagar Usdadia, Rasik Shiyal, Rasik Shiyal
DOI : 10.18231/2455-6777.2018.0016
Volume : 4
Issue : 2
Year : 0
Page No : 68-72
Aim: Operative treatment of shaft humerus fracture continues to evolve. MIPPO is one of such emerging operative procedure which does give excellent results over conventional ORIF platting. We are comparing overall functional outcome and surgical complexity of MIPPO (Minimal Invasive Percutaneous Plate Osteosynthesis) vs conventional ORIF (Open Reduction and Internal Fixation) by posterior approach in this study.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective clinical study was done on 50 patients with shaft humerus fractures treated with MIPPO anterior bridge plating and posterior platting by trained single surgeon at a tertiary trauma care centre in the Department of Orthopaedics, BJ medical college, Civil hospital Ahmedabad between October 2016 and May 2018. Follow up data was collected and patients were called for clinical and radiological evaluation.
Results: 24 of the 25 (96%) MIPPO patients and 22 of the 25 (88%) ORIF patients achieved union. Average union times for the MIPPO and ORIF groups were 19.3 and 16.1 weeks respectively. At the end functional outcome of both the technique is as follows: the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS; range 95–100) were 90% in 20 cases (n = 20) operated with conventional ORIF posterior plating and 20 cases operated with MIPPO plating which is excellent scores. Two cases operated with ORIF posterior plating and three cases with MIPPO plating are showing a good MEPS score.
Conclusions: Even though MIPPO is surgically demanding, fracture hematoma is not disturbed in it therefore it gives better and fast union than conventional ORIF.
Keywords: Conventional ORIF, MIPPO platting, Fracture, Humerus.