<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-04-27T21:38:46Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/84011" metadataPrefix="dim">https://uvadoc.uva.es/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/84011</identifier><datestamp>2026-04-13T19:01:13Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_10324_1138</setSpec><setSpec>com_10324_931</setSpec><setSpec>com_10324_894</setSpec><setSpec>col_10324_1226</setSpec></header><metadata><dim:dim xmlns:dim="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.dspace.org/xmlns/dspace/dim http://www.dspace.org/schema/dim.xsd">
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="contributor" qualifier="author" authority="e7120127608c293f" confidence="600" orcid_id="">Aguado Hernández, Héctor José</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="accessioned">2026-04-12T19:13:32Z</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="available">2026-04-12T19:13:32Z</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="date" qualifier="issued">2021</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="citation" lang="es">Injury, 52 Suppl 4, S125–S130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2021.01.049</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="issn" lang="es">0020-1383</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="uri">https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/84011</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="doi" lang="es">10.1016/j.injury.2021.01.049</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="publicationfirstpage" lang="es">S125</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="publicationlastpage" lang="es">S130</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="publicationtitle" lang="es">Injury</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="identifier" qualifier="publicationvolume" lang="es">52</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="description" qualifier="abstract" lang="es">Introduction: The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of applying the MIPO technique with a helical-shaped plate in the treatment of humeral shaft fractures with proximal extension.&#xd;
&#xd;
Patients and methods: We present an observational prospective study of patients with a humeral shaft fracture involving the proximal humerus fixed with a long proximal humerus polyaxial locking plate with an anterior curvature and helical shape (ALPS® Zimmerbiomet, Warsaw, Indianapolis, USA), using a MIPO technique. Between January 2017 and July 2020, 15 patients were treated at our institution. Proximally a 4-5 cm anterolateral transdeltoid approach was made. And distally, a 5-7 cm incision was made 4 cm proximal to the elbow crease. At each follow-up, radiographs were taken to evaluate fracture healing. Funtional scales were applied to evaluate clinical results.&#xd;
&#xd;
Results: Ten women and five men were included, with a mean age of 62 yo (range 26-86). All but one fracture healed uneventfully. The mean time to union was 28 weeks (range 12-48 weeks). Two out of 15 patients presented complications (an atrophic nonunion and a peri‑implant distal fracture). None of the patients had a nerve palsy prior neither after the surgery. No other complications, including infection, were registered during follow-up. Shoulder range of motion showed the following means: abduction of 147° (range 50°-180°), anterior flexion of 144° (range 80°-180°), external rotation of 77,5 ° (range 70°-80°) and internal rotation of 54.5° (range 45°-60°). All patients recovered their pre-fracture elbow range of motion. All patients presented less than 10° of angular deviation in varus/valgus or ante/recurvatum after the surgical procedure. At the end of the follow-up, all final functional scores were "good" or "excellent": mean Constant-Murley score was 72 ± 13 (range 38-91), ASES score was 73 ± 12 (range 41-88), UCLA shoulder scale was 30 ± 3,5 (range 10-35), and Q-DASH score was 16.5 ± 0,11 (range 4-57).&#xd;
&#xd;
Conclusion: When applied correctly, the treatment of diaphyseal humeral fractures involving the proximal humerus using a polyaxial locking helical plate with a MIPO technique is a reliable treatment method. It has high union rates with low complications.</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="format" qualifier="mimetype" lang="es">application/pdf</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="language" qualifier="iso" lang="es">spa</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="rights" qualifier="accessRights" lang="es">info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="title" lang="es">MIPO helical pre-contoured plates in diaphyseal humeral fractures with proximal extension. Surgical technique and results</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="type" lang="es">info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="type" qualifier="hasVersion" lang="es">info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dim:field>
<dim:field mdschema="dc" element="peerreviewed" lang="es">SI</dim:field>
</dim:dim></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>