Routine Transposition or In Situ Decompression? Rethinking Ulnar Nerve Strategy in Distal Humerus Fractures


Creative Commons License

Öztürk T., Gedikbaş M., Erpala F., Aşçı M.

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE, cilt.14, sa.20, ss.1-11, 2025 (SCI-Expanded, Scopus)

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 14 Sayı: 20
  • Basım Tarihi: 2025
  • Doi Numarası: 10.3390/jcm14207233
  • Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Scopus, Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Academic Search Premier, Directory of Open Access Journals
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1-11
  • Açık Arşiv Koleksiyonu: AVESİS Açık Erişim Koleksiyonu
  • Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Background: Fractures of the distal humerus (DHFs) represent challenging intra-articular

injuries that are often followed by postoperative complications, most notably ulnar neu-

ropathy. There is still debate regarding the best method of handling the ulnar nerve during

open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Objective: The primary objective was to

evaluate the incidence of postoperative ulnar neuropathy (UN) in patients who underwent

open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for DHFs, comparing anterior transposition

(AT) with in situ decompression (ISD) of the ulnar nerve. Additionally, we investigated the

influence of AT on individuals presenting with preoperative UN. Methods: A retrospective

review was conducted on 68 patients (26 females and 42 males; mean age: 46.3 years) who

underwent ORIF for intra-articular DHF between 2018 and 2022. Patients were divided

into two groups: anterior transposition (n = 14) and in situ decompression (n = 54). Ulnar

neuropathy was evaluated using the modified McGowan classification, and radiographic

outcomes were assessed with AO/OTA fracture classification. Results: Sixty-eight pa-

tients (26F/42M) were included. The mean age was 46.3 years (20–77 years) and the mean

follow-up time was 53 months (36–76 months). The postoperative UN incidence was 30.8%

(21/68). Neuropathy was significantly higher in the transposition group compared to in

situ decompression (57.1% vs. 24%; p = 0.012). Olecranon osteotomy (36.3% vs. 20%;

p = 0.042) and parallel plate configuration (33.3% vs. 12.5%; p = 0.037) were also associated

with increased neuropathy risk. Among patients with preoperative ulnar neuropathy

(n = 12), functional recovery was more favorable with transposition, where 71% experi-

enced full resolution compared to 60% in the in situ group. Conclusions: Routine anterior

transposition of the ulnar nerve during ORIF for DHF is associated with an increased

risk of postoperative neuropathy and should be avoided in patients without preoperative

symptoms. However, transposition appears beneficial in patients with pre-existing ulnar

neuropathy. Surgeons should individualize ulnar nerve management to balance surgical

risks and neurological outcomes.