This study aims to provide an updated review comparing the complication rates and clinical outcomes of intramedullary nails and locking plates (LPs) in displaced proximal humerus fracture (PHF) management. We performed a systematic review of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinical Trials Registry, EMBASE, and PubMed. Studies with level III evidence or higher comparing intramedullary nails and LPs used for internal fixation of displaced PHFs were included. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) criteria and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.2.0 were used to assess the risk of bias. Our meta-analysis included a comparison of method-related complications, pain scores, range of motion (ROM), and functional scores. A total of 13 comparative studies were included: five randomized controlled trials, three prospective cohort studies, and five retrospective cohort studies. The total number of patients included was 1,253 (677 in the LP group and 576 in the intramedullary nail group). Superior Constant-Murley scores and external rotation ROM were found in the LP group during the early postoperative period. However, long-term functional scores and complication rates were comparable between the two groups. We conclude that intramedullary nailing and LP fixation are both equally effective for the treatment of displaced PHFs. Neither treatment appears superior at this time, and more large-scale randomized controlled trials should be conducted to further evaluate the potential benefit of LPs in the early postoperative period.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated treatment patterns for long bone fractures and factors that contribute to use of intramedullary nails (IMN).
METHODS: Patients from IBM MarketScan® Research Commercial and Medicare Databases with femoral/tibial/humeral fractures during inpatient admission between January 2016-July 2019 were identified. Patients were categorized by treatment (i.e., non-surgical/internal fixation [extramedullary internal fixation/plating]/IMN/external fixation). Four-year rates of IMN were reported by fracture type. Logistic regression evaluated factors contributing to IMN use.
RESULTS: 14,961 femoral, 14,101 tibial, and 7,059 humeral fracture patients were identified (mean[SD] age was 45.3[18.9], 42.0[16.3], and 39.8[21.6] years and % female 50.8%, 47.7%, and 55.3%, respectively). Mean(SD) lengths of stay were 6.7(9.2), 5.9(7.0), and 5.8(10.3) days, rates of surgical treatment were 74.3%, 84.0%, and 62.7%, and rates of IMN among surgical patients were 46.6%, 27.1%, and 6.7% for femoral, tibial, and humeral fractures, respectively. IMN was the predominant treatment for femoral fractures over the past 4 years. Factors contributing to IMN use included open/closed diaphyseal fractures, pathological fractures, diagnoses of cancer or AIDS/HIV, and alcohol abuse.
CONCLUSIONS: IMN was the predominant treatment for femoral fractures and use slightly increased for tibial/humeral fractures. Open/closed diaphyseal fractures, pathological fractures, cancer or AIDS/HIV, and alcohol abuse contributed to IMN use.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes of modular endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) compared to proximal femur intramedullary nailing (IMN) for the treatment of proximal femur metastases.
METHODS: We retrospectively studied the records of patients with proximal femur metastatic lesions treated with surgical stabilization between January 2007 and December 2014 in terms of operation time, blood loss, postoperative score, soreness, Karnofsky performance score (KPS) and survival time.
RESULTS: There were 34 patients treated with surgical stabilization. The mean follow-up period was 12.1?.6 months (range: 10-47 months). Thirteen were treated with EPR and 21 were stabilized with IMN (20 males, 14 females; mean age: 68.7 years). The median survival time was 11.0 months for both groups (P=0.147). The operation time, blood loss and Harris score of IMN group were lower than those of EPR group (P=0.001, P=0.001, P=0.002, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Both EPR and IMN for treating proximal femur metastasis achieved effective clinical outcomes. Therefore, the suitable surgical methods depended on the general conditions and medical requirements of patients, as well as the technical advantages of the doctor.