Plate fixation is the gold standard for diaphyseal fracture management, and the anterolateral approach is widely used by reconstructive surgeons. However, the outcomes of humeral shaft fracture fixation using a medial approach are rarely reported. The aim of this study is to explore the management and outcomes of humeral mid-shaft fractures fixed through a medial incision. Thirty-four patients who sustained a humeral mid-shaft fracture and underwent an open-reduction internal fixation (ORIF) in our department between January 2010 and January 2013 were included in this study. Sixteen patients had an ORIF performed through a medial approach, while the remaining 18 were fixed through an anterolateral approach. Postoperative clinical and radiographic results were reviewed. There were no significant differences in the blood loss and the range of motion of the shoulder and elbow between the anterolateral and medial fixation groups. One patient in the medial group and two patients in the anterolateral group had radial nerve dysfunction that improved after 8, 3 and 6 weeks, respectively. All patients healed radiographically except one from the anterolateral group who underwent grafting and re-fixation for a non-union. No vascular injuries, infections, malunions, broken plates or loose screws were noted in either group. The medial approach to the humerus had equivalent outcomes to anterolateral fixation. It is an available choice for humeral mid-shaft fracture fixation in cases where there is no need to expose the radial nerve. The medial approach does not require a pre-bent plate and creates a large operative exposure. A well-hidden incision can also be designed, improving cosmetic outcomes. However, the medial approach is not suitable to proximal or distal humerus fractures.

Purpose: Traumatic sciatic nerve injury is one of the most serious consequences of acetabular fracture. However, reports on this type of injury are rare. In this study, we investigated the demographics of acetabular fracture with traumatic sciatic nerve injury, the clinical characteristics of patients with these injuries, and potential risk factors. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients diagnosed to have acetabular fracture at our trauma center between January 2014 and June 2021. Data on patient demographics, characteristics of the acetabular fracture, whether or not sciatic nerve injury occurred, types of sciatic nerve injury, and risk factors were analyzed. Results: A total of 195 patients met the diagnostic criteria for acetabular fractures. The average Injury Severity Score was 25.9 and the average Abbreviated Injury Scale score was 12.4. Road traffic accidents and falls from height were the main causes. Chest injuries and lower extremity fractures were the most common associated injuries. Posterior wall fractures were the most common fracture type. After exclusion of spinal cord and iatrogenic sciatic nerve injuries, 18 patients with acetabular fractures had traumatic sciatic nerve injury. Four of the 19 sides with traumatic sciatic nerve injury involved the common peroneal nerve division and 15 involved both the common peroneal and tibial nerve divisions. Logistic regression analysis identified a higher AIS score, posterior column fracture, and posterior hip dislocation to be predictors of traumatic sciatic nerve injury. Conclusion: Acetabular fractures were mostly high-energy injuries. Posterior wall fractures were the most common acetabular fracture types. Most patients sustained injury to the sciatic nerve as well as injury to the common peroneal and tibial nerve divisions. A higher AIS score, posterior column fracture, and posterior hip dislocation were predictors of acetabular fracture combined with traumatic sciatic nerve injury.

Background: The combination of pelvic fractures with lower urinary tract injuries (LUTIs) is a severe traumatic injury. This study was performed to determine the relationship between LUTIs and pelvic fracture types. Methods: Patients who sustained pelvic fractures combined with LUTIs between 1 January 2018 and 1 January 2022 in our institution were retrospectively analyzed. The patients’ demographics, mechanism of injury, presence of open pelvic fractures, types of pelvic fractures, patterns of LUTIs, and early complications were analyzed. The association between pelvic fracture types and the identified LUTIs was statistically analyzed. Results: This study involved 54 patients diagnosed with pelvic fractures combined with LUTIs. The overall incidence of pelvic fractures combined with LUTIs was 7.7% (n = 54/698). All patients had unstable pelvic fractures. The male:female ratio was approximately 2.4:1.0. The incidence of LUTIs was higher in men than women with pelvic fractures (9.1% vs. 4.4%). Bladder injuries occurred at roughly equal rates in men and women (4.5% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.966), but urethral injuries were more frequent in men (6.1% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.001). The most common pelvic injury pattern was a type C fracture according to the Tile classification and a vertical-shear-type fracture according to the Young–Burgess classification. The Young–Burgess fracture classification was related to the severity of bladder injury in men (p = 0.037). There was no significant difference in bladder injury according to the two classifications among women (p = 0.524 vs. p = 1.000) or among the entire cohort (p = 0.454 vs. p = 0.342). Conclusions: Men and women are equally likely to sustain a bladder injury, but a urethral injury with pelvic fracture is more frequent in men. LUTIs tend to be accompanied by unstable pelvic fractures. It is imperative to be vigilant for potential bladder injury when men sustain vertical-shear-type pelvic fractures.

Background: Reports on traumatic sciatic nerve injury associated with acetabular fracture are rare. In this study, we investigated the demographics of these injuries, their clinical characteristics, management, and factors potentially influencing neurological recovery. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients diagnosed to have acetabular fracture at our trauma center between January 2014 and June 2021. Data on patient demographics, characteristics of sciatic nerve injury, neurological recovery, factors potentially influencing neurological recovery were analyzed. Results: Eighteen patients (bilateral in one case) met the diagnostic criteria. All these injuries involved the posterior wall or posterior column, and most patients had posterior dislocation of the hip joint. Four of the 19 sides with traumatic sciatic nerve injury involved the common peroneal nerve division and 15 involved both the common peroneal and tibial nerve divisions. Seventeen patients (18 sides) underwent intraoperative nerve exploration, which revealed abnormalities in 7 sides and no obvious abnormality in 11 sides. At the last follow-up, 10 sides (52.6%) had complete recovery and 9 (47.4%) had partial recovery; the difference was statistically significant between those with or without abnormal nerve damage during exploration (P = 0.046). Linear regression analysis showed that a nerve abnormality detected intraoperatively was a predictor of nerve recovery (P = 0.009). The mean recovery time was significantly longer for partial recovery than for complete recovery (13.78 months vs. 6.70 months; P = 0.001). Conclusions: All the injuries in this series involved the posterior wall or posterior column, and most patients had posterior dislocation of the hip joint. Damage to the common peroneal nerve division was more severe than that to the tibial nerve division preoperatively. However, the degree of recovery of the common peroneal division was not worse than that of the tibial division. There was a relationship between the degree of neurological recovery and whether there was an abnormality at the time of intraoperative nerve exploration. Patients with partial recovery took longer to recover.

Floating hip is a severe high-energy injury. Femoral fracture is an essential component of floating hip. However, few studies have addressed the relationship between the femoral fracture pattern and floating hip injury. In this study, we reviewed and summarized the epidemiological and clinical data of patients with floating hip. We retrospectively reviewed patients with a diagnosis of floating hip at our trauma center from January 2014 to December 2021. Data on patient demographics, characteristics of the injuries, associated injuries, whether sciatic nerve palsy (SNP) occurred, the number of operations performed, and the total length of hospital stay were analyzed. A total of 76 patients met the diagnostic criteria for floating hip, 45 of whom had proximal femoral fractures. The mean Injury Severity Scores in patients with proximal and non-proximal femoral fractures were 21.47 ± 10.67 and 17.61 ± 7.64, respectively, and the mean Abbreviated Injury Scale scores were 13.31 ± 9.71 and 9.52 ± 4.32, respectively. Motor vehicle collision and a fall from a height were the main causes of injury. Chest injury was the most common associated injury. Twenty-two patients were diagnosed with SNP, 17 of whom had a proximal femoral fracture. Of the patients with pelvic fractures, 15 were diagnosed with SNP, 14 of whom also had a proximal femoral fracture. Of the patients with acetabular fractures, seven were diagnosed with SNP, three of whom also had a proximal femoral fracture. More than half of patients with floating hips have a combined proximal femoral fracture. In this study, fracture of the pelvis or acetabulum combined with a proximal femoral fracture had a higher AIS score and higher risk of SNP than fracture of the pelvis or acetabulum combined with a non-proximal femoral fracture. Patients with a single pelvic fracture showed similar results, but patients with a single acetabular fracture did not. A pelvic or acetabular fracture combined with a proximal femoral fracture has a different outcome than a mid-distal femoral fracture, which may be a “true” floating hip.

Background Reports on traumatic sciatic nerve injury associated with acetabular fracture are rare. In this study, we investigated the demographics of these injuries, their clinical characteristics, management, and factors potentially influencing neurological recovery. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all patients diagnosed to have acetabular fracture at our trauma center between January 2014 and June 2021. Data on patient demographics, characteristics of sciatic nerve injury, neurological recovery, factors potentially influencing neurological recovery were analyzed. Results Eighteen patients met the diagnostic criteria for acetabular fracture combined with sciatic nerve injury (bilateral in one case). All of these injuries involved the posterior wall or posterior column, and most patients had posterior dislocation of the hip joint. Four of the 19 sides with traumatic sciatic nerve injury involved the common peroneal nerve division and 15 involved both the common peroneal and tibial nerve divisions. The mean common peroneal and tibial nerve division injury scores were 1.79 ± 0.92 and 2.68 ± 1.57, respectively. Seventeen patients (18 sides) underwent intraoperative nerve exploration, which revealed abnormalities in 7 sides and no obvious abnormality in 11 sides. At the last follow-up, 10 sides (52.6%) had complete recovery and 9 (47.4%) had partial recovery; the difference was statistically significant between those with or without abnormal nerve damage during exploration (P < 0.05). Linear regression analysis showed that a nerve abnormality detected intraoperatively was a predictor of nerve recovery (P < 0.05). The degree of neurological recovery was not related to sex, age, cause of injury, type of fracture, hip dislocation, or femoral head injury in patients whether recovery was partial or complete. The mean recovery time was significantly longer for partial recovery than for complete recovery (13.78 months vs 6.70 months; P < 0.05). Conclusions All the injuries in this series involved the posterior wall or posterior column, and most patients had posterior dislocation of the hip joint. Damage to the common peroneal nerve division was more severe than that to the tibial nerve division preoperatively. However, the degree of recovery of the common peroneal division was not worse than that of the tibial division. There was a relationship between the degree of neurological recovery and whether there was an abnormality at the time of intraoperative nerve exploration. Patients with partial recovery took longer to recover.