Distal humeral fracture

Last revised by Leonardo Lustosa ◉ on 12 Jul 2022

Citation, DOI, disclosures and article data

Citation:

Feger J, Lustosa L, Murphy A, et al. Distal humeral fracture. Reference article, Radiopaedia.org (Accessed on 01 Jun 2023) https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-82642

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53347/rID-82642

Permalink:

https://radiopaedia.org/articles/82642

rID:

82642

Article created:

1 Oct 2020, Joachim Feger ◉

Disclosures:

At the time the article was created Joachim Feger had no recorded disclosures.

View Joachim Feger's current disclosures

Last revised:

12 Jul 2022, Leonardo Lustosa ◉

Disclosures:

At the time the article was last revised Leonardo Lustosa had no recorded disclosures.

View Leonardo Lustosa's current disclosures

Revisions:

10 times, by 4 contributors - see full revision history and disclosures

Systems:

Musculoskeletal, Trauma

Tags:

snippet, cases

Synonyms:

distal humerus fractures
Distal humeral fractures
distal humerus fracture

Distal humeral fractures are traumatic injuries involving the epicondyles, the trochlea, the capitellum and the metaphysis of the distal humerus and are often the result of high energy trauma such as road traffic accidents or a fall from a height. In the elderly, they may occur as a domestic accident ^1-3.

direct impaction of the proximal ulna onto the trochlea or the capitellum, with the elbow in a flexed or extended position – this usually results in a complete articular fracture
indirect valgus or varus trauma in elbow extension – this usually results in a complete articular fracture
direct compression of the capitellar articular surface by the radial head either in extension or full flexion – results in an isolated capitellar fracture

Classification

Distal humeral fractures can be classified based on the following ⁵:

articular involvement (extraarticular, partial articular or complete articular fractures)
number of fragments (simple, fragmentary, multifragmentary)
the affected distal humeral segments (trochlea, capitellum, epicondyles)
the plane of the fracture (sagittal, coronal)
the height of the transverse fracture (transcondylar, supracondylar)

A commonly used classification system of distal humeral fractures, which takes those features into account is the AO/OTA classification ⁵.

Other classifications are the Milch classification of single columnar articular fractures, which differentiates fractures on whether the lateral trochlear ridge is affected or intact and the Jupiter classifications for bi-columnar articular fractures. Coronal shear fractures can be classified after Bryan and Morrey or Dubberley ^1-4.

Radiographic features

Fractures will usually show a radiolucency or cortical breach. Depending on how they are displaced there may be features of overlay and/or impaction.

Plain radiographs are the mainstay of diagnosis of distal humeral fractures. CT can be a helpful adjunct for the characterization of intra-articular fractures and surgical planning ^1-4.

MRI is rarely needed in the acute setting can be helpful in concomitant ligamentous injuries ¹.

Plain radiograph

Standard elbow radiographs AP view with the elbow flexed 40° and elbow lateral view with the shoulder abducted and the elbow flexed to 90° each should be obtained.

CT

The main objective of CT is an improved characterization of the exact fracture morphology. This can be supplemented with 3D images, which has been shown to improve the reliability of fracture characterization and classification ⁶.

Radiology report

fracture lines and plane
location to the joint
extra-articular, partial or complete articular
involvement of the trochlea, the capitellum or both
simple, fragmentary, multi-fragmentary
signs of complications if evident (e.g. neurovascular injury)

A common distal humeral fracture in childhood is the supracondylar fracture.

Treatment and prognosis

Most distal humeral fractures are managed surgically since prolonged immobilization of one week or longer tends to lead to poor functional outcomes. The risk of prolonged fracture healing or fracture non-union is up to six times higher with conservative treatment than with surgery. Conversely, a good or excellent outcome has been shown for surgical fixation in long term follow-ups ^1,2,4.

Non-operative, conservative management can be considered in stable non-displaced partial articular fractures (Milch type 1) and predominantly in low-demand patients with a high perioperative risk profile ^1,2.

The primary goal of surgical treatment is an anatomical reconstruction of the articular surface and to gain stability to allow for early functional treatment for maintaining range of motion within the elbow joint. Open reduction and internal fixation with pre-contoured locking plates and headless compression screws are usually performed to achieve this goal ^1-3.

Open fractures and fractures with neurovascular complications or associated compartment syndromes require an emergency operation ¹.

There are different approaches with regard to the fracture type ^1,2:

Epicondylar fractures are usually treated with screw fixation, for better rotational stability two screws can be used ¹.

Extra-articular metaphyseal fractures are usually treated with preshaped locking plates and cortical screw fixation ¹.

Partial articular fractures are usually managed with pre-contoured locking plates of the affected side and additional screw fixation ¹. Coronal shear fractures can be managed with headless compression screws possibly accompanied by a pre-contoured locking plate if they are posteriorly comminuted ^1,4.

Complete articular fractures are treated with a double-plate construction supplemented by additional metaphyseal screw fixation ^1-4.

Very comminuted, non-reconstructable fractures or patients with pre-existing osteoarthritis or poor boine quality e.g. due to osteoporosis might need and profit from hemiarthroplasty or total elbow arthroplasty ^1-3.