Dataset Information

A prospective randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative management of fractures of the humeral diaphysis: the HUmeral Shaft Fracture FIXation (HU-FIX) Study protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Humeral shaft fractures constitute around 1% of adult fractures in the UK, with an annual incidence of approximately 13 per 100,000 population. Historically, these injuries have been primarily managed non-operatively, with operative fixation reserved for specific indications. Although some recent retrospective studies have suggested there are potential benefits of operative fixation over humeral bracing, there is a deficiency in level 1 evidence to support operative management as the primary treatment for humeral shaft fractures.

Methods/design

This single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial aims to recruit 70 adult patients with an isolated closed fracture of the humeral diaphysis into one of two treatment arms: operative (n = 35) or non-operative (n = 35). The operative arm will undergo open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of the fracture using a standard fixation technique (plate and screws). The non-operative arm will be fitted with a prefabricated humeral brace until fracture union. All patients will be followed up for 1 year post-intervention. The primary outcome measure will be the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score at 3 months post-intervention. Secondary outcome measures will include pain, treatment complications, return to work or sporting activities, shoulder and elbow range of motion, radiographic assessment, EuroQol (EQ-5D) Health Outcome score and 12-item Short Form (SF-12) Health Survey score. A health economic analysis will be performed to compare the cost implications of each treatment strategy.

Discussion

This randomised controlled trial will provide level 1 evidence comparing a standard ORIF technique against functional bracing for isolated closed humeral shaft fractures. The investigators hope that the study results will assist surgeons in their decision-making when managing patients with these injuries.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03689335 . Registered on 28 September 2018 (retrospectively).

SUBMITTER: Oliver WM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6683573 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A prospective randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative management of fractures of the humeral diaphysis: the HUmeral Shaft Fracture FIXation (HU-FIX) Study protocol.

Oliver William M WM Carter Thomas H TH Graham Catriona C White Timothy O TO Clement Nicholas D ND Duckworth Andrew D AD Molyneux Samuel G SG

Trials 20190805 1

<h4>Background</h4>Humeral shaft fractures constitute around 1% of adult fractures in the UK, with an annual incidence of approximately 13 per 100,000 population. Historically, these injuries have been primarily managed non-operatively, with operative fixation reserved for specific indications. Although some recent retrospective studies have suggested there are potential benefits of operative fixation over humeral bracing, there is a deficiency in level 1 evidence to support operative management ...[more]

PMID: 31383027

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Reoperation rates are high after surgery for hip fractures. We investigated the effect of a sliding hip screw versus cancellous screws on the risk of reoperation and other key outcomes. METHODS:For this international, multicentre, allocation concealed randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients aged 50 years or older with a low-energy hip fracture requiring fracture fixation from 81 clinical centres in eight countries. Patients were assigned by minimisation with a centralised computer system to receive a single large-diameter screw with a side-plate (sliding hip screw) or the present standard of care, multiple small-diameter cancellous screws. Surgeons and patients were not blinded but the data analyst, while doing the analyses, remained blinded to treatment groups. The primary outcome was hip reoperation within 24 months after initial surgery to promote fracture healing, relieve pain, treat infection, or improve function. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00761813. FINDINGS:Between March 3, 2008, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 1108 patients to receive a sliding hip screw (n=557) or cancellous screws (n=551). Reoperations within 24 months did not differ by type of surgical fixation in those included in the primary analysis: 107 (20%) of 542 patients in the sliding hip screw group versus 117 (22%) of 537 patients in the cancellous screws group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·83, 95% CI 0·63-1·09; p=0·18). Avascular necrosis was more common in the sliding hip screw group than in the cancellous screws group (50 patients [9%] vs 28 patients [5%]; HR 1·91, 1·06-3·44; p=0·0319). However, no significant difference was found between the number of medically related adverse events between groups (p=0·82; appendix); these events included pulmonary embolism (two patients [<1%] vs four [1%] patients; p=0·41) and sepsis (seven [1%] vs six [1%]; p=0·79). INTERPRETATION:In terms of reoperation rates the sliding hip screw shows no advantage, but some groups of patients (smokers and those with displaced or base of neck fractures) might do better with a sliding hip screw than with cancellous screws. FUNDING:National Institutes of Health, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Stichting NutsOhra, Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, Physicians' Services Incorporated.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Although most humeral nonunions are successfully treated with a single procedure, some humeral nonunions are more difficult to heal and require multiple procedures. Current literature does not provide evidence describing how the prognosis for surgical repair in patients who develop humeral diaphyseal nonunions may be affected by initial operative versus nonoperative treatment. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES:The purpose of this study was to assess whether operative versus nonoperative treatment of acute humeral shaft fractures impacts outcome of subsequent repairs of humeral nonunions (NU) including the need for additional surgery and a comparison of pain relief (Visual Analogue Scale for pain) and functional outcome (Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment). METHODS:Thirty-four patients with humeral shaft nonunion were evaluated of which 15 patients had been treated operatively (OF), and 19 patients had been treated nonoperatively (NO) for their initial humerus shaft fracture. All patients underwent plating with autogenous bone graft or allograft ± bone morphogenic protein (BMP) 2 or 7 as their final NU repair surgery prior to healing. We compared functional outcome and pain for both cohorts and determined risk factors for requiring more than 1 nonunion repair surgery. RESULTS:The mean time of final follow-up was 14.7?±?10.4 months. Thirty-three of 34 NUs (97.1%) healed. Patients who underwent OF of their original fracture were more likely to require more than 1 NU repair surgery (66.7 vs. 0%, p?<?0.01). Of the 15 patients who underwent initial OF, 33.0% required 1 NU surgery, 33.0% required 2 NU surgeries, and 33.0% required 3 NU surgeries. Patients who underwent initial OF were more likely to require >6 months to achieve union (40.0 vs. 10.5%, p?=?0.04). At final follow-up, there was no difference in functional outcome or pain scores. Initial OF was the only independent predictor of needing more than 1 NU repair surgery (OR 70.1 CI 2.8-1762.3) to achieve healing. CONCLUSION:Humeral shaft nonunions following initial operative fixation of the index fracture is more resistant to achieving union when compared to nonunions forming after initial nonoperative treatment. When final healing is achieved, there is no difference in function or pain.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the surgical treatment of humeral shaft fracture. The present meta-analysis was performed to compare the efficacy and safety between antegrade intramedullary nailing (IMN) and plating for humeral shaft fracture.MethodsPubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Clinical Trails, Ovid, ISI Web of Science, and Chinese databases including WanFang Data, China National Knowledge Infrastructure were searched through March 10, 2019. The Review Manager software was adapted to perform statistical analysis and relative risk (RR) were used for the binary variables, and weighted mean difference and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used to measure the continuous variables. Each variable included its 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsA total of 15 trials with 839 patients were included in the analysis. There was significant difference between IMN group and plate group in blood loss (SMD = 3.49, 95% CI: 1.19, 5.79, P = .003) and postoperative infections (RR = 3.04, 95% CI: 1.49, 6.24, P = .002). Additionally, significant difference was observed between minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) group and IMN group in nonunion rate (RR = 3.20, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.84, P = .02). Statistical significance was also observed between the open reduction plate fixation group and IMN group in restriction of shoulder and elbow joints results (RR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26, 0.96, P < .05). No significant difference was observed for the operation time, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, nerve injury, delayed union, reoperation in either group.ConclusionIMN may be superior to plate in reducing blood loss and postoperative infections for the treatment of humeral shaft fracture. However, MIPO was superior to IMN group in nonunion and equal to IMN in other parameters. Further research is required and future studies should include analysis of assessments at different stages and follow-up after removal of the implants.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Humeral shaft fractures represent 1%-3% of all fractures and 20% of humeral fractures in adults. The treatment of these fractures is mainly conservative and operative treatment is usually reserved for specific circumstances. To date, no randomised controlled trial (RCT) has compared operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures with conservative treatment. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will conduct an RCT to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical and conservative treatment of humeral shaft fractures. After providing informed consent, 80 patients from 18 years of age with humeral shaft fracture will be randomly assigned to open reduction and internal fixation with locking plate or conservative treatment with functional bracing. We will follow the patients for 10 years and compare the results at different time points. The primary outcome will be Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) at 12 months. The secondary outcomes will include Numerical Rating Scale for pain at rest and in activities, Constant Score and quality of life instrument 15D. Patients not willing to participate in the RCT will be asked to participate in a prospective cohort follow-up study, 'the declined cohort'. This cohort will be followed up at the same time points as the randomised patients to assess the potential effect of participation bias on RCT results and to enhance the external validity of the RCT. In one of the recruiting centres, all cooperative patients with humeral shaft fractures not eligible for randomisation will be asked to participate in a 'non-eligible cohort' study. We will use blinded data interpretation of the randomised cohort to avoid biased interpretation of outcomes. Our null hypothesis is that there is no clinically relevant difference in the primary outcome measure between the two treatment groups. We will consider a difference of a minimum of 10 points in DASH clinically relevant. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The institutional review board of the Helsinki and Uusimaa Hospital District has approved the protocol. We will disseminate the findings of this study through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01719887; pre-results.

Dataset Information

A prospective randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative management of fractures of the humeral diaphysis: the HUmeral Shaft Fracture FIXation (HU-FIX) Study protocol.

Background

Methods/design

Discussion

Trial registration

Publications

A prospective randomised controlled trial of operative versus non-operative management of fractures of the humeral diaphysis: the HUmeral Shaft Fracture FIXation (HU-FIX) Study protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets