%20(1).png)
Objective: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of anterolateral or posterolateral dual plating in patients who underwent surgery because of extra-articular fractures of the distal one-third of the humerus.
Methods: Patients were followed-up for a minimum of 2 years and were evaluated and compared with each other in terms of union time, surgery duration, intraoperative fluoroscopy shot count, iatrogenic nerve injury, infection, need for revision surgery, and elbow flexion-extension degrees and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scores at the last follow-up.
Results: Twenty patients (mean age 35.6 ± 5.4 years; range 25-47) who underwent surgery and received anterolateral dual-plate fixation were compared with 19 patients (mean age 34.7 ± 4.8 years; range 23-47) who underwent posterolateral dual-plate fixation between January 2018 and October 2021 (P > .05). No significant differences were observed between the 2 groups in terms of sixth month DASH score, union time, elbow flexion, elbow extension, infection, iatrogenic nerve injury, or need for revision surgery (P > .05). However, the differences in duration of surgery and number of fluoroscopy shots between the groups were significant (P < .05).
Conclusion: Because the patient lies in the supine position during anterolateral dual plating, there is a positional advantage over posterolateral dual plating, particularly in polytrauma patients. Anterolateral dual plating is a safer alternative to posterolateral dual plating because of the shorter preoperative preparation and the lower fluoroscopy shot counts.
Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study