Skip to main content
OrthoVellumOrthopaedic Exam Prep
Pricing
About OrthoVellum
OrthoVellum
A living orthopaedic atlas

Exam-focused orthopaedic references, a question bank, viva practice, and spaced-repetition revision β€” with every clinical claim traceable to its source. Content is educational only and is not a substitute for local supervision, clinical judgement, or institutional policy.


Library

  • Clinical Topics
  • Blog
  • Site Updates
  • Content Methodology

Company

  • About Us
  • Authors & Disclosure
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Policy
  • Advertising Policy

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA

Support

  • Support OrthoVellum
  • Help Center
  • Contact
  • Accessibility
Evidence. Clarity. Practice.

Β© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not medical advice. Verify clinically important information against current local guidance.

Anterior Approach to Humeral Shaft (Henry)

Operative SurgeryTrauma
TraumaAdvancedCore Procedure

Anterior Approach to Humeral Shaft (Henry)

Comprehensive guide to the anterior (Henry) approach to the humeral shaft for ORIF of mid/distal humerus fractures with emphasis on radial nerve protection

Procedure console
28 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed Β· 2026-06-20
High-yield overview

Brachialis split Β· Radial nerve ~14cm from the lateral epicondyle Β· Distal-third carries the highest nerve risk

14.2cmRadial nerve crosses posterior humerus this far proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996)
4-6%Iatrogenic (secondary) radial nerve palsy after operative fixation (Entezari 2021)
94-97%Union rate with plate ORIF for acute humeral shaft fractures
~71%Spontaneous recovery of conservatively managed primary radial nerve palsy (Shao 2005)
Critical Must-Knows
  • The internervous plane is between biceps (musculocutaneous nerve) and brachialis β€” but brachialis has DUAL innervation (musculocutaneous medially, radial laterally), so it is split longitudinally in its midline.
  • The radial nerve crosses the posterior humerus to reach a point a mean 14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996) β€” it is the PRIMARY structure at risk.
  • The Holstein-Lewis fracture (distal-third spiral) is the classic pattern for radial nerve palsy; distal-third fractures carry the highest odds of nerve injury (OR 6.3 versus proximal β€” Entezari 2021).
  • Use SUBPERIOSTEAL dissection only β€” never dissect posteriorly around the spiral groove, where the nerve is tethered to bone via the lateral intermuscular septum.
  • An immediate post-operative (secondary) palsy with intact pre-operative function raises concern for iatrogenic injury β€” many surgeons re-explore early, though most secondary palsies still recover spontaneously.
  • A primary fracture palsy (present at injury) is observed first β€” about 71 percent recover spontaneously with conservative care (Shao 2005).

When & Why


What it exposes. The anterior (Henry) approach gives direct access to the middle and distal third of the humeral shaft for ORIF of fractures, nonunion repair and tumour excision. First described by Henry in 1945, it is the most commonly used corridor for humeral shaft fractures needing fixation. Why anterior (and not posterior). Supine positioning is familiar, anaesthesia-friendly and allows simultaneous procedures in the polytrauma patient; the brachialis-splitting interval spares the triceps and the extensor mechanism; and the plate sits anterolaterally on the tension side (optimal biomechanics). The posterior approach is reserved for a mid-shaft fracture at the spiral groove where the radial nerve must be directly visualised and protected, or for nerve exploration β€” it brings the nerve into the field but needs prone or lateral positioning and carries extensor-mechanism morbidity. Position & landmarks. Supine, arm on a radiolucent side table, shoulder at the table edge for circumferential access; no tourniquet (a pneumatic tourniquet risks brachial plexus compression). Fluoroscopy (C-arm) is essential. The incision runs along the lateral border of biceps, from 2 to 3cm distal to the anterior axillary fold (coracoid level) to 5cm proximal to the antecubital crease (15 to 20cm). Do not extend proximal to the coracoid (axillary nerve risk) or distally across the elbow crease (lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve injury, unsightly scar). When to operate. Functional bracing remains first-line for closed, isolated fractures with acceptable alignment, but several situations demand fixation.

Absolute
Detail
Open fracture, vascular injury requiring repair (brachial artery, 2-3 percent of shaft fractures), polytrauma, bilateral shaft fractures, floating elbow, pathological fracture (metastases with more than 50 percent cortical destruction)
Management
ORIF via anterior approach (or alternative as dictated by fracture/nerve status)
Relative
Detail
Unacceptable alignment (more than 20 degrees varus/valgus, more than 30 degrees AP angulation, more than 3cm shortening), radial nerve palsy appearing with manipulation (suggests entrapment), progressive displacement on serial films, segmental fracture, patient factors (obesity, non-compliance)
Management
ORIF versus functional bracing
Non-operative (first-line)
Detail
Closed, isolated fracture with acceptable alignment (under 20 degrees varus/valgus, under 30 degrees AP, under 3cm shortening) and intact nerve function
Management
Sarmiento functional bracing β€” high union, about 2 percent nonunion in closed fractures (Sarmiento 2000)
Operative versus non-operative decision
CategoryDetailManagement
AbsoluteOpen fracture, vascular injury requiring repair (brachial artery, 2-3 percent of shaft fractures), polytrauma, bilateral shaft fractures, floating elbow, pathological fracture (metastases with more than 50 percent cortical destruction)ORIF via anterior approach (or alternative as dictated by fracture/nerve status)
RelativeUnacceptable alignment (more than 20 degrees varus/valgus, more than 30 degrees AP angulation, more than 3cm shortening), radial nerve palsy appearing with manipulation (suggests entrapment), progressive displacement on serial films, segmental fracture, patient factors (obesity, non-compliance)ORIF versus functional bracing
Non-operative (first-line)Closed, isolated fracture with acceptable alignment (under 20 degrees varus/valgus, under 30 degrees AP, under 3cm shortening) and intact nerve functionSarmiento functional bracing β€” high union, about 2 percent nonunion in closed fractures (Sarmiento 2000)

Approach selection. The fracture level and the radial nerve status drive the choice between anterior and posterior.

Fracture location
Anterior (Henry)
Middle/distal third shaft (below deltoid insertion)
Posterior
Mid-shaft at the spiral groove level
Preferred
Depends on fracture level
Radial nerve visualisation
Anterior (Henry)
NOT routinely visualised β€” lies outside the field
Posterior
DIRECTLY visualised in the triceps-splitting field
Preferred
Posterior (direct visualisation)
Secondary (iatrogenic) nerve injury
Anterior (Henry)
About 4-6 percent after fixation; nerve not directly seen (Entezari 2021)
Posterior
Lower when the nerve is directly visualised and protected
Preferred
Posterior (when the nerve must be controlled)
Patient positioning
Anterior (Henry)
Supine (familiar, polytrauma-friendly)
Posterior
Prone or lateral decubitus (difficult for polytrauma)
Preferred
Anterior (supine is easier)
Muscle handling
Anterior (Henry)
Brachialis splitting (minimal denervation, spares the extensor mechanism)
Posterior
Triceps splitting or TRAP (extensor-mechanism morbidity; TRAP preserves the insertion)
Preferred
Anterior (spares triceps)
Plate biomechanics
Anterior (Henry)
Anterolateral (tension side β€” optimal)
Posterior
Posterior (compression side β€” suboptimal)
Preferred
Anterior (better biomechanics)
Anterior versus posterior approach selection
FactorAnterior (Henry)PosteriorPreferred
Fracture locationMiddle/distal third shaft (below deltoid insertion)Mid-shaft at the spiral groove levelDepends on fracture level
Radial nerve visualisationNOT routinely visualised β€” lies outside the fieldDIRECTLY visualised in the triceps-splitting fieldPosterior (direct visualisation)
Secondary (iatrogenic) nerve injuryAbout 4-6 percent after fixation; nerve not directly seen (Entezari 2021)Lower when the nerve is directly visualised and protectedPosterior (when the nerve must be controlled)
Patient positioningSupine (familiar, polytrauma-friendly)Prone or lateral decubitus (difficult for polytrauma)Anterior (supine is easier)
Muscle handlingBrachialis splitting (minimal denervation, spares the extensor mechanism)Triceps splitting or TRAP (extensor-mechanism morbidity; TRAP preserves the insertion)Anterior (spares triceps)
Plate biomechanicsAnterolateral (tension side β€” optimal)Posterior (compression side β€” suboptimal)Anterior (better biomechanics)

The Exposure


Work down through the layers along the lateral border of biceps, retract biceps medially to carry the neurovascular bundle out of the field, then split the dual-innervated brachialis in its midline and expose the shaft subperiosteally β€” protecting the radial nerve at every step.

Anterior humeral shaft approach
Anterior approach to the humeral shaft, exposing the bone between biceps and brachialis.Credit: OrthoVellum surgical illustration

Exposure sequence

Step 1Position and setup
  • Supine on the table, arm on a radiolucent side table, shoulder at the table edge so the arm can be moved for circumferential access and fluoroscopy.
  • No tourniquet β€” a pneumatic tourniquet on the proximal arm risks brachial plexus compression.
  • Fluoroscopy (C-arm) available throughout; general or regional anaesthesia (interscalene block gives 12 to 18 hours of analgesia).
Step 2Skin incision
  • Incise along the lateral border of biceps, from 2 to 3cm distal to the anterior axillary fold (coracoid level) to 5cm proximal to the antecubital crease β€” typically 15 to 20cm.
  • Landmarks: coracoid process proximally, the easily palpable lateral border of biceps (elbow flexed) in the mid-arm, and the biceps tendon distally.
  • Do not extend proximal to the coracoid (axillary nerve) or across the elbow crease (lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve, unsightly scar).
Step 3Superficial dissection
  • Incise skin and subcutaneous tissue; identify and protect the cephalic vein (deltopectoral groove proximally, continuing distally in the lateral subcutaneous plane) and ligate small perforators.
  • Open the deep fascia along the lateral border of biceps longitudinally.
  • Confirm the interval: biceps medially is soft and mobile; brachialis laterally is firm, covering the anterior humerus.
Step 4Open the internervous plane
  • Retract the biceps belly medially β€” this sweeps the brachial artery and median nerve medially, away from the surgical field.
  • The brachialis is now exposed covering the anterior humerus, from the deltoid insertion to the coronoid process.
Step 5Split brachialis longitudinally
  • Brachialis has dual innervation: medial part from the musculocutaneous nerve, lateral part from the radial nerve.
  • Split it longitudinally, in the line of its fibres (parallel to the humerus) at its midline β€” the internervous plane within the muscle β€” separating the musculocutaneous-innervated medial fibres from the radial-innervated lateral fibres.
  • Extend the split proximally and distally to expose the required length; never split transversely (violates fibres and innervation).
Step 6Subperiosteal exposure of the shaft
  • With a Cobb elevator, elevate brachialis subperiosteally off the humerus (volar, medial and lateral surfaces) and expose the fracture proximal-to-distal.
  • NEVER dissect posteriorly around the spiral groove β€” the radial nerve is adherent to bone there via the lateral intermuscular septum.
Step 7Protect the radial nerve when the case demands it
  • For distal-third/Holstein-Lewis patterns or revision surgery, identify the radial nerve at the lateral intermuscular septum as a cord-like structure about 4 to 5mm across crossing the spiral groove, and protect it with a vessel loop β€” before any fracture manipulation.
  • Routine nerve identification is NOT recommended for a standard mid-shaft fracture (it adds dissection and risk); reserve it for high-risk patterns.
Subperiosteal, proximal-to-distal, never posterior to the spiral groove

The radial nerve crosses the posterior humerus to a mean point 14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996) and is tethered to bone at the lateral intermuscular septum. Keep all dissection strictly subperiosteal, work proximal-to-distal so you encounter the nerve predictably, and never dissect circumferentially around the posterolateral humerus. For a distal-third spiral (Holstein-Lewis) pattern, identify and protect the nerve at the lateral intermuscular septum before you touch the fracture β€” distal-third fractures carry the highest nerve-injury odds (OR 6.3 versus proximal β€” Entezari 2021).

Match the approach to the fracture level

The anterior approach is best for middle and distal-third shaft fractures. For a proximal-third fracture (above the deltoid insertion) use the deltopectoral approach, and for a fracture at or around the spiral groove where the nerve must be controlled, many surgeons prefer the posterior approach, which visualises the radial nerve directly.

Dangers & Extensions


Structures at risk, by layer

Deep muscle / bone
Structure at risk
Radial nerve at the spiral groove and lateral intermuscular septum (tethered, mean 14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle)
Protection
Subperiosteal dissection only; proximal-to-distal exposure; identify at the lateral septum for distal-third spiral patterns
Medial to biceps
Structure at risk
Brachial artery with the median nerve (artery injured in 2-3 percent of shaft fractures)
Protection
Retract biceps medially as a unit; avoid dissection medial to biceps
Distal dissection
Structure at risk
Lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (LABC) emerging lateral to the biceps tendon
Protection
Stay 5cm proximal to the elbow crease; avoid excessive distal dissection
Bone
Structure at risk
Nonunion (5-8 percent), infection (2-3 percent), shoulder stiffness (10-15 percent)
Protection
6 to 8 cortices each side; limited periosteal stripping; early ROM
Danger structures and how to protect them
LayerStructure at riskProtection
Deep muscle / boneRadial nerve at the spiral groove and lateral intermuscular septum (tethered, mean 14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle)Subperiosteal dissection only; proximal-to-distal exposure; identify at the lateral septum for distal-third spiral patterns
Medial to bicepsBrachial artery with the median nerve (artery injured in 2-3 percent of shaft fractures)Retract biceps medially as a unit; avoid dissection medial to biceps
Distal dissectionLateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve (LABC) emerging lateral to the biceps tendonStay 5cm proximal to the elbow crease; avoid excessive distal dissection
BoneNonunion (5-8 percent), infection (2-3 percent), shoulder stiffness (10-15 percent)6 to 8 cortices each side; limited periosteal stripping; early ROM

Intra-operative nerve injury (secondary/iatrogenic, about 4-6 percent). Mechanisms include excessive lateral retraction or traction during reduction, subperiosteal dissection straying around the tethered posterolateral humerus, drill or screw penetration of the far cortex, and entrapment beneath the plate or by a suture. Prevention rests on subperiosteal dissection only, proximal-to-distal exposure, and identifying the nerve at the lateral intermuscular septum for Holstein-Lewis patterns before reduction. Recognise it intra-operatively as loss of wrist and finger extension, or post-operatively as a wrist drop with weak EPL, EDC, EIP, APL and EPB while elbow extension and dorsal web-space sensation are preserved. Post-operative nerve palsy β€” make the critical distinction. A secondary palsy with intact pre-operative function raises concern for iatrogenic injury (traction, suture or plate entrapment, thermal injury). If the nerve was directly handled, lay at the fracture site, or its integrity is in doubt, early re-exploration is reasonable β€” identify it at the lateral intermuscular septum and perform neurolysis if in continuity, or primary repair or graft if lacerated. Most secondary palsies are neurapraxic and recover, so observation with nerve studies is also defensible when the nerve was not handled. A primary fracture palsy (present at injury, unchanged post-operatively) is observed: about 71 percent recover spontaneously (Shao 2005), nerve studies are obtained if there is no recovery by around 9 weeks (Entezari 2021), and exploration is considered at 4 to 6 months. If no recovery occurs, tendon transfers follow at around 9 to 12 months (PT to ECRB for wrist extension; FCR or FDS to EDC for finger extension; PL to a rerouted EPL for thumb extension). Extensile options. Extend proximally along the deltopectoral interval for proximal-third access (above the deltoid insertion the deltopectoral approach is preferred). Extend distally toward the elbow, staying clear of the crease. When a mid-shaft fracture at the spiral groove demands direct nerve visualisation, switch to the posterior approach β€” the modified exposure of Gerwin reflects both triceps heads medially after distal nerve identification and exposes a mean 26.2cm of diaphysis (versus 15.4cm for a standard triceps-splitting approach). Closure. Brachialis reapproximation with interrupted absorbable sutures is optional (the muscle heals spontaneously). Close the deep fascia and subcutaneous layer with absorbable sutures and the skin with a running subcuticular or interrupted suture. Apply a coaptation splint for 7 to 10 days, then a sling; wound check at 1 to 2 weeks, early shoulder and elbow pendulum/passive ROM at 2 weeks, active ROM at 6 weeks, and radiographic follow-up at 2, 6 and 12 weeks.

Procedures Through This Approach


  • ORIF of middle and distal-third shaft fractures β€” the principal operation. Reduce with direct manipulation, longitudinal traction and rotation control, holding fragments with pointed or Weber clamps and verifying with fluoroscopy.
  • Plate fixation (gold standard). A 4.5mm narrow LCP or LC-DCP is placed on the anterolateral humerus (the tension side) with 6 to 8 cortices proximal and distal (AO principles). Use compression or lag-through-plate screws for simple transverse or short-oblique patterns; locking screws for osteoporotic, comminuted or metaphyseal extension; and bridge plating for comminuted fractures (span the comminution, do not reconstruct every fragment).
  • Nonunion and malunion β€” revision ORIF with bone grafting (iliac crest autograft), a larger plate, and smoking cessation; BMP-2 may be considered for high-risk atrophic nonunion.
  • Pathological fracture β€” prophylactic fixation for metastatic lesions.
  • Polytrauma β€” early stabilisation in the multiply-injured patient.
  • Intramedullary nailing retains a role in segmental, pathological and osteoporotic fractures, but pooled randomised data favour plating (Bhandari 2006).
Plate versus IM nail β€” what the evidence shows

The Bhandari 2006 meta-analysis (3 RCTs, 155 patients) found plate fixation significantly lowered reoperation (RR 0.26, 95 percent CI 0.007 to 0.9, p=0.03 β€” about a 74 percent relative reduction, one reoperation prevented per 10 patients plated) and shoulder problems (RR 0.10, 95 percent CI 0.03 to 0.4, p=0.002), reflecting the rotator-cuff/impingement morbidity of antegrade nailing. The authors noted the cumulative evidence remained inconclusive and called for a larger trial, but plating is the usual first-line for diaphyseal humeral fractures.

Viva & Exam Focus


Mnemonic

HUMERUSHUMERUS β€” anterior approach key steps

H
Henry's plane
Biceps (musculocutaneous) versus brachialis, split along its dual innervation (musculocutaneous medial, radial lateral)
U
Upper arm supine
Supine, arm on a radiolucent side table β€” circumferential access, no tourniquet
M
Middle/distal third
Best for middle and distal-third shaft (below deltoid insertion), not proximal third
E
Expose proximal-to-distal
Reduces the risk of meeting the radial nerve unexpectedly at the spiral groove
R
Radial nerve 14cm
Reaches ~14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996), tethered at the lateral intermuscular septum
U
Union 94-97%
Plate ORIF achieves high union (97 percent in Dabezies 1992) with lower reoperation than IM nailing
S
Subperiosteal only
Never dissect posteriorly around the spiral groove β€” the nerve is adherent to bone
Mnemonic

HOLSTEINHOLSTEIN β€” Holstein-Lewis fracture management

H
Highest nerve risk
Distal-third fractures carry the highest odds of radial nerve palsy (OR 6.3 versus proximal β€” Entezari 2021)
O
Oblique spiral distal third
Spiral pattern in the distal third, near where the nerve pierces the lateral septum
L
Lateral intermuscular septum
Nerve is tethered here β€” identify it before fracture manipulation
S
Spiral groove 14cm
Nerve reaches ~14.2cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996, n=10)
T
Trapped nerve possible
The spiral fracture line may entrap the radial nerve β€” the classic Holstein-Lewis association
E
Explore before reduction
If pre-op function is intact, identify the nerve at the lateral septum before reducing the fracture
I
Intact pre-op then palsy
A secondary palsy raises concern for iatrogenic injury β€” low threshold to re-explore if the nerve was handled
N
Neurapraxia usually recovers
Most nerves in continuity recover; transection (open/complex injury) carries a poor prognosis (Ring 2004)

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practise clinical reasoning and management decisions out loud

Viva scenarioStandard
Clinical prompt

β€œA 45-year-old man sustains a closed mid-shaft humerus fracture after a fall β€” a transverse fracture at the junction of the middle and distal third with 15 degrees varus, 20 degrees anterior angulation and 1cm shortening, and an intact radial nerve. What are the indications for operative versus non-operative management, and how would you manage him?”

Viva scenarioChallenging
Clinical prompt

β€œA 32-year-old woman has a distal-third spiral humeral shaft fracture (Holstein-Lewis pattern) after a road crash, with intact radial nerve function and 25 degrees varus angulation. You plan ORIF via the anterior approach. Describe your strategy to protect the radial nerve, and quantify the nerve-injury risk.”

Viva scenarioCritical
Clinical prompt

β€œA 50-year-old man has a mid-shaft humerus fracture at the level of the spiral groove with 30 degrees anterior angulation and an intact radial nerve, for which you plan operative fixation. Compare the anterior and posterior approaches for this fracture β€” which would you choose and why?”

Exam day cheat sheet
Anterior approach to the humeral shaft β€” exam-day essentials

Essential anatomy

  • Internervous plane: between biceps (musculocutaneous nerve) medially and brachialis β€” which has dual innervation (musculocutaneous medially, radial laterally) β€” requiring a LONGITUDINAL brachialis split in the midline
  • Radial nerve course: posteromedial proximally, then posterior across the spiral groove, then lateral distally where it pierces the lateral intermuscular septum
  • Nerve crossing point: a mean 14.2cm (SD 0.6) proximal to the lateral epicondyle (Gerwin 1996, n=10) β€” the key reference for safe exposure
  • Nerve adherence: relatively tethered to the posterolateral humerus at the lateral intermuscular septum and cannot be easily mobilised
  • Holstein-Lewis fracture: distal-third spiral near the nerve crossing β€” the classic pattern for radial nerve palsy; distal-third fractures carry the highest nerve-injury odds (OR 6.3 versus proximal β€” Entezari 2021)

Surgical technique pearls

  • Positioning: SUPINE, arm on a radiolucent side table, shoulder at the table edge, NO tourniquet (brachial plexus compression risk)
  • Incision: along the lateral border of biceps, from 2 to 3cm distal to the axillary fold (coracoid level) to 5cm proximal to the antecubital crease (15 to 20cm)
  • Brachialis split: retract biceps medially, find the midline of brachialis, split LONGITUDINALLY in the line of its fibres
  • Radial nerve protection: proximal-to-distal exposure; subperiosteal dissection only (never circumferentially around the posterolateral humerus); for distal-third spiral patterns identify the nerve at the lateral intermuscular septum BEFORE fracture manipulation
  • Plate fixation: 4.5mm narrow LCP on the ANTEROLATERAL humerus (tension side), 6 to 8 cortices proximal and distal (AO principles)
  • Closure: brachialis repair optional (heals spontaneously), coaptation splint 7 to 10 days, early ROM at 2 weeks

Evidence-based outcomes

  • Plate ORIF: high union (97 percent at an average 12 weeks in the Dabezies 1992 acute series); plating lowers reoperation and shoulder problems versus IM nailing
  • Plate versus IM nail (Bhandari 2006 meta-analysis, 3 RCTs, 155 patients): lower reoperation (RR 0.26) and fewer shoulder problems (RR 0.10) with plating; authors called the cumulative evidence inconclusive
  • Radial nerve palsy at injury: overall about 11.8 percent (Shao 2005); highest with middle/middle-distal and transverse/spiral patterns; distal-third OR 6.3 (Entezari 2021)
  • Primary fracture palsy: about 71 percent recover spontaneously with conservative care (Shao 2005); operative fixation does not change recovery (Entezari 2021). Nerve studies if no recovery by around 9 weeks; consider exploration by 4 to 6 months
  • Secondary (iatrogenic) palsy: about 4 to 6 percent after fixation (Entezari 2021); low threshold to re-explore if the nerve was handled or entrapped, otherwise observe; nerves in continuity nearly always recover, transection (open complex injury) has a poor prognosis (Ring 2004)

Indications and decision-making

  • Absolute operative indications: open fractures, vascular injury, polytrauma, bilateral fractures, floating elbow, pathological fractures (metastases with more than 50 percent cortical destruction)
  • Relative operative indications: failed closed reduction (more than 20 degrees varus/valgus, more than 30 degrees AP angulation, more than 3cm shortening), radial nerve palsy with manipulation, progressive displacement, segmental fractures
  • Non-operative (functional bracing) β€” first-line for closed, isolated fractures with acceptable alignment (under 20 degrees varus/valgus, under 30 degrees AP, under 3cm shortening). High union (about 2 percent nonunion in closed fractures β€” Sarmiento 2000)
  • Anterior approach best for: middle/distal-third shaft (below deltoid insertion), polytrauma (supine), distal shaft fractures
  • Posterior approach best for: mid-shaft at the spiral groove (radial nerve directly visualised β€” Gerwin 1996), nerve exploration, revision surgery

Complications and management

  • Radial nerve injury (secondary/iatrogenic about 4 to 6 percent): highest with distal-third spiral patterns (OR 6.3 β€” Entezari 2021). Prevent with subperiosteal dissection, proximal-to-distal exposure, and nerve identification for distal-third spirals
  • Secondary post-op palsy (pre-op intact): suspect iatrogenic injury β€” low threshold for early re-exploration if the nerve was handled or entrapped (neurolysis or repair); most neurapraxic palsies recover spontaneously
  • Primary fracture palsy (at injury): OBSERVE β€” about 71 percent spontaneous recovery (Shao 2005). Nerve studies if no recovery by around 9 weeks; consider exploration by 4 to 6 months
  • Nonunion (5 to 8 percent): risk factors include inadequate fixation (fewer than 6 cortices), smoking and infection. Manage with revision ORIF and bone grafting (iliac crest autograft), a larger plate, and smoking cessation
  • Infection (2 to 3 percent): superficial β€” oral antibiotics; deep β€” irrigation and debridement plus culture-guided IV antibiotics for 6 weeks, retaining hardware if healing is progressing
  • Shoulder stiffness (10 to 15 percent): prevent with early ROM at 2 weeks and a short coaptation splint (7 to 10 days only); manage with physiotherapy, corticosteroid injection, or MUA if it persists beyond 6 months

Guidelines, registries and global practice

  • Epidemiology: humeral shaft fractures are about 3 to 5 percent of all fractures, with a bimodal distribution β€” younger men from high-energy trauma and older women from low-energy osteoporotic falls
  • Radial nerve palsy: overall about 11.8 percent at injury (Shao 2005); highest with middle/middle-distal and transverse/spiral patterns; distal-third fractures carry the greatest odds (Entezari 2021)
  • Management paradigm (global consensus): functional bracing is first-line for closed, isolated fractures with acceptable alignment; operative fixation for open fractures, vascular injury, polytrauma, bilateral fractures, floating elbow, failed bracing, or unacceptable alignment. The FISH and HUSH randomised trials inform the surgery-versus-bracing debate
  • Implant choice: plate fixation is the usual first-line; pooled data favour plating over IM nailing for lower reoperation and shoulder morbidity (Bhandari 2006). IM nailing retains a role in segmental, pathological and osteoporotic fractures
  • Antibiotic prophylaxis: a single pre-incision first-generation cephalosporin (e.g. cefazolin) is standard worldwide; add gram-negative cover for open fractures per local protocols (e.g. BOAST, AAOS)
  • Thromboprophylaxis: routine pharmacological VTE prophylaxis is generally NOT indicated for isolated upper-limb ORIF; early mobilisation is the primary prevention. Reserve chemoprophylaxis for additional VTE risk factors
  • Analgesia: multimodal (paracetamol plus opioid as needed, opioid-sparing adjuncts); regional anaesthesia (interscalene block) gives good perioperative analgesia. Avoid routine NSAIDs in the early healing phase where nonunion is a concern
  • Modifiable healing factors: smoking substantially increases nonunion risk β€” preoperative smoking cessation and optimisation of diabetes and nutrition are recommended globally
  • Specialist referral: persistent radial nerve palsy beyond 4 to 6 months, or suspected nerve laceration, warrants referral to a peripheral nerve or upper-limb specialist for nerve studies and possible exploration, neurolysis, repair/graft, or tendon transfer

References


Evidence

Plate Fixation of Acute Humeral Shaft Fractures

IV
Dabezies EJ, Banta CJ 2nd, Murphy CP, d'Ambrosia RD β€’ Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma (1992)
Key Findings:
  • Consecutive case series of 44 acute humeral shaft fractures treated with plate internal fixation
  • Union: 97 percent (43 of 44) healed at an average of 12 weeks; the single failure (short plate pull-out) healed after revision with a longer plate and bone grafting
  • All 11 open fractures (8 gunshot) healed uneventfully after early plating
  • 15 radial nerve injuries were associated with the fractures; 12 anatomically intact palsies recovered at an average of 17 weeks after plate fixation
  • Plate size varied with fracture location and bone size; 8 of 9 fractures fixed with 3.5mm plates healed uneventfully
Clinical implication: An early series establishing that plate ORIF of acute humeral shaft fractures achieves a high union rate (97 percent) with reliable spontaneous recovery of intact radial nerve palsies. Operative exposure also allows direct assessment of nerve integrity, informing prognosis.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 1556609)
Evidence

Radial Nerve Topography Relative to Posterior Humeral Exposures

III
Gerwin M, Hotchkiss RN, Weiland AJ β€’ Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) (1996)
Key Findings:
  • Anatomical study of 10 cadaveric specimens defining the radial nerve course on the posterior humerus
  • The nerve crossed the posterior humerus from a mean 20.7cm (SD 1.2) proximal to the medial epicondyle to a mean 14.2cm (SD 0.6) proximal to the lateral epicondyle
  • A standard triceps-splitting approach exposed a mean 15.4cm of distal humerus up to the point where the nerve crossed
  • A modified posterior approach (distal identification of the nerve, reflecting both triceps heads medially) exposed a mean 26.2cm of the diaphysis
  • No branches to the medial head of triceps were found on the posterior humerus, supporting safe medial reflection in the modified approach
Clinical implication: This cadaveric mapping underpins radial nerve injury risk during humeral shaft surgery: the nerve reliably reaches a point about 14cm proximal to the lateral epicondyle, and posterior exposures must respect this crossing point. It also justifies the modified (extensile) posterior approach for proximal diaphyseal access.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 8934483)
Evidence

Radial Nerve Palsy with Humeral Shaft Fractures β€” Systematic Review

II
Shao YC, Harwood P, Grotz MRW, Limb D, Giannoudis PV β€’ Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British) (2005)
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review: 35 eligible papers; prevalence pooled from 21 papers (4,517 fractures), recovery from a total of 1,045 patients with palsy
  • Overall prevalence of radial nerve palsy: 11.8 percent (532 of 4,517 fractures)
  • Middle and middle-distal shaft fractures had significantly higher palsy rates; transverse and spiral patterns more than oblique or comminuted (p less than 0.001)
  • Overall recovery: 88.1 percent (921 of 1,045); spontaneous recovery in conservatively treated patients: 70.7 percent (411 of 581)
  • No significant difference in final results between expectant management and early exploration, favouring initial observation
Clinical implication: The largest synthesis supporting INITIAL OBSERVATION for radial nerve palsy associated with humeral shaft fractures: about 71 percent recover spontaneously with conservative care and early exploration confers no advantage. The middle/middle-distal shaft and transverse/spiral patterns carry the highest palsy risk.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 16326879)
Evidence

Radial Nerve Palsy with High-Energy Humeral Shaft Fractures

IV
Ring D, Chin K, Jupiter JB β€’ Journal of Hand Surgery (American) (2004)
Key Findings:
  • Retrospective review of 24 patients with high-energy diaphyseal humeral fractures and COMPLETE radial nerve palsy
  • All 6 patients with a transected nerve had an open fracture as part of a complex upper-limb injury; 5 of 6 had primary repair and none recovered
  • All 8 intact explored nerves and 9 of 10 unexplored nerves recovered; the single non-recovery followed closed IM rod fixation (possible iatrogenic injury)
  • Mean time to first signs of recovery was 7 weeks (range 1 to 25); mean time to full recovery 6 months (range 1 to 21)
  • Nerve transection was confined to open, complex injuries β€” the indication for exploration
Clinical implication: Transection is essentially restricted to open, complex high-energy injuries and carries a poor prognosis even after repair. Palsies with closed fractures (including high-energy patterns) nearly always recover, supporting patience before tendon transfer and selective rather than routine exploration.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 14751118)
Evidence

Compression Plating versus Intramedullary Nailing β€” Meta-Analysis

I
Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, McKee MD, Schemitsch EH β€’ Acta Orthopaedica (2006)
Key Findings:
  • Meta-analysis of 3 homogeneous randomised trials (155 patients) comparing plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing
  • Reoperation: significantly lower with plating (RR 0.26, 95 percent CI 0.007 to 0.9, p=0.03) β€” about a 74 percent relative risk reduction; one reoperation prevented for every 10 patients plated
  • Shoulder problems: significantly lower with plating (RR 0.10, 95 percent CI 0.03 to 0.4, p=0.002), reflecting rotator cuff and impingement morbidity of antegrade nailing
  • Authors concluded the cumulative evidence remained inconclusive and that a larger trial was needed
  • Only 3 of 215 screened citations met inclusion criteria, underscoring the limited high-level evidence base
Clinical implication: Best available pooled randomised evidence favours plate fixation over IM nailing for diaphyseal humeral fractures through lower reoperation and shoulder morbidity, while acknowledging the modest sample size. Plate ORIF (commonly via the anterior approach) is the usual first-line surgical option.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 16752291)
Evidence

Functional Bracing for Fractures of the Humeral Diaphysis

IV
Sarmiento A, Zagorski JB, Zych GA, Latta LL, Capps CA β€’ Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) (2000)
Key Findings:
  • Landmark series of functional bracing for humeral diaphyseal fractures in 620 followed patients
  • Nonunion occurred in only about 2 percent of closed fractures and about 6 percent of open fractures
  • Bracing permitted early adjacent-joint motion and avoided surgical and anaesthetic risk
  • Acceptable alignment was maintained in the large majority with varus/valgus and AP angulation within accepted limits
  • Established functional bracing as the gold-standard non-operative option for closed, isolated shaft fractures with acceptable alignment
Clinical implication: Defines the non-operative benchmark against which operative fixation is judged: high union (about 2 percent nonunion in closed fractures) with functional bracing, underpinning its place as first-line for closed, isolated humeral shaft fractures with acceptable alignment.
Verify source (DOI)
Evidence

Predictors of Nerve Injury and Recovery After Humeral Shaft Fracture

III
Entezari V, Olson JJ, Vallier HA β€’ Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (2021)
Key Findings:
  • Retrospective cohort of 376 humeral shaft fractures (96 with traumatic nerve palsy, 280 neurovascularly intact)
  • Nerve palsy present in 25.5 percent at injury; radial nerve most commonly involved (93.6 percent)
  • Independent predictors of palsy: concomitant vascular injury (OR 52), distal-third fractures (OR 6.3), middle-third (OR 2.8) versus proximal, open fracture (OR 2.1), high-energy trauma (OR 1.7)
  • Iatrogenic (secondary) nerve injury detected in 7 patients (4.6 percent), all affecting the radial nerve
  • Spontaneous recovery in 91 percent of traumatic palsies; operative fixation did not change recovery rate; nerve studies recommended if no recovery by around 9 weeks
Clinical implication: A large modern cohort confirming distal-third fractures carry the highest nerve-injury risk and quantifying secondary (iatrogenic) radial palsy at about 4.6 percent after fixation. It supports expectant management of primary palsy with nerve studies at around 9 weeks if no recovery, and shows operative treatment does not impair recovery.
Verify on PubMed (PMID 33964428)
Evidence

AO Principles of Fracture Management (2nd edition)

RΓΌedi TP, Buckley RE, Moran CG β€’ Thieme, Stuttgart (2007)
Key Findings:
  • Standard reference for absolute and relative stability, plate function (compression, neutralisation, buttress, bridge) and locked plating
  • Diaphyseal fixation principles: 6 to 8 cortices of fixation proximal and distal to the fracture
  • Reduction and fixation strategies for simple, wedge and complex (comminuted) fracture patterns
  • Defines the framework for implant choice and surgical decision-making used in humeral shaft ORIF
Clinical implication: Provides the operative principles (fixation length, plate function, reduction technique) on which anterior-approach humeral shaft plating is based.
Editorially reviewed β€” transparent references and correction processPublished by OrthoVellum Medical Education TeamEditorial boardMethodologyReview policy
Educational disclosure

Educational content is reviewed for source visibility, editorial coherence, and correction readiness.

No individual clinician credential is claimed unless a named person is shown.

Verify before clinical use; this is not medical advice or a substitute for local guidance.

Procedure console
28 min
Read
0
Sections
advanced
Level
Peer-reviewed Β· 2026-06-20
Procedure info
Level
advanced
Read time
28 min
Updated
2026-06-20
PROCEDURES USING THIS APPROACH
Humeral Shaft Fracture Fixation (Plating vs Nailing)
Browse all procedures