The Treatment of Three-Part Fractures of Humeral Head: A Retrospective Study to Compare Nail vs. Plate

Background: There are no clear guidelines to support management decisions for patients with three-part fractures of the proximal humerus. The aim of the study is to identify the treatment used and to assess the functional and radiological outcomes at follow-up. Methods: A total of 126 patients were retrospectively included in the study and were divided into two groups based on the type of surgery: plate and nail group. We collected data on the patient’s sex, age, fracture type, surgery duration, fracture healing, initial and final neck–shaft angles, shoulder joint score, and complications. Results: A total of 69 patients received locking-plate internal fixation, while 77 patients underwent fixation with intramedullary nail. The two groups were comparable, with no significant differences observed in age, sex, or the number of patients. The average operation time for the locking-plate group (88.7 ± 10.5 min) was significantly longer compared to the intramedullary nail group (70.2 ± 8.3 min). The Constant–Murley score was 91.2 ± 6.7 (range 79–98) in the plate group and 90.5 ± 7.7 (range 80–98) in the nail group, with no statistically significant difference. Complications were observed in 16 patients (23.2%) of the locking-plate group and in 7 patients (9.1%) of the intramedullary nail group, with significant difference. Conclusions: Our assessment revealed no significant differences in fracture healing times, loss of reduction, or Constant–Murley scores between two groups. However, our results suggest that intramedullary nails have an advantage over locking plates in terms of reduced operation time and complications.