Comparison between minimally invasive deltoid-split and extended deltoid-split approach for proximal humeral fractures: a case-control study

Table 1 The differences of patients’ demographic information between two groups

Characteristic	ORIF group	MIPPO group	p value
Number of patients	51	64
Sex (male/female)	25/26	27/37	0.465
Age (year)	62.02 ± 10.65	62.09 ± 12.74	0.973
Height (m)	1.64 ± 0.09	1.63 ± 0.07	0.281
Weight (Kg)	64.57 ± 8.45	63.50 ± 10.41	0.554
Hypertension	18 (35.29%)	17 (26.56%)	0.312
Diabetes	8 (15.69%)	8 (12.50%)	0.624
Cardiopathy	3 (5.88%)	2 (3.12%)	0.471
Mechanism of injury			0.440
Low-engery	42 (82.35%)	56 (87.50%)
High-engery	9 (17.65%)	8 (12.50%)
Injury side			0.114
Dominant side	36 (70.59%)	36 (56.25%)
Non-dominant side	15 (29.41%)	28 (43.75%)

Data are mean standard deviation or number of cases and percentages; ORIF, Open reduction and internal fixation; Mippo, Minimally invasive percutaneous plate internal fixation

ISSN: 1471-2474