Deltopectoral vs. deltoid split approach for proximal HUmerus fracture fixation with locking plate: a prospective RAndomized study (HURA)

Background: This study aimed to compare the functional and clinical outcomes between the deltoid split (DS) approach and the classic deltopectoral (DP) approach for locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures (PHF) in a prospective randomized multicenter study.

Methods: From 2007 to 2015, all patients with a PHF Neer II/III were invited to participate. Exclusion criteria were pre-existing pathology to the limb, patient refusing or too ill to undergo surgery, patient needing another type of treatment (nail, arthroplasty), and axillary nerve impairment. After consent, patients were randomized to one of the 2 treatments using the dark envelope method. Functional outcome was evaluated by validated questionnaires (12-Item Short Form Health Survey: version 2, Quick-DASH) with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Complications were noted.

Results: A total of 85 patients (44 DS, 41 DP) were randomized (mean age of 62). Groups were equivalent in terms of age, gender, body mass index, severity of fracture, and preinjury scores. The mean follow-up was 26 months. All clinical outcome measures were in favor of the deltopectoral approach. Specifically, the Q-DASH and SF-12v2 were better in the DP group (12 vs. 26, P = .003 and 56 vs. 51, P = .049, respectively). There were more complications in DS patients, but they did not reach statistical significance.

Conclusions: The primary hypothesis on the superiority of the deltoid split incision was rebutted. On the basis of our study, the DP approach seems to offer better function compared with the DS approach for fixation of Neer 2 and 3 PHF fractures fixed with a locking plate.