Objective To review the biomechanics of internal fixators for proximal humeral fractures, and to compare the mechanical stabil ity of various internal fixators. Methods The l iterature concerning the biomechanics of internal fixators for proximal humeral fractures was extensively analyzed. Results The most important things for best shoulder functional results are optimal anatomical reduction and stable fixation. At present, there are a lot of methods to treat proximal humeral fractures. Locking-plate exhibites significant mechanical stabil ity and has many advantages over other internal fixators by biomechanical comparison. Conclusion Locking-plate has better fixation stabil ity than other internal fixators and is the first choice to treat proximal humeral fractures.
ObjectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of limited open reduction via “door-shaft method” and internal fixation with locking plate for two- and three-part fractures of the proximal humerus.MethodsThe clinical data of 64 patients with proximal humeral fractures who were admitted between January 2013 and December 2016 and met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. There were 23 males and 41 females, with an average age of 68.0 years (range, 50-89 years). The injuries were caused by falling in 57 cases, traffic accident in 5 cases, and falling from height in 2 cases. The interval between injury and operation was 1-7 days (mean, 2.1 days). According to Neer classification, there were 28 cases of two-part fractures and 36 cases of three-part fractures. According to the angulation direction of the proximal humeral neck shaft angle, there were 21 cases of adduction fractures and 43 cases of abduction fractures. The fractures were treated with limited open reduction via “door-shaft method” and proximal humerus internal locking systems for internal fixation. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, number of fluoroscopy, hospital stay, and complications were recorded. The fracture healing was reviewed by X-ray film and the healing time was recorded. The shoulder joint function was evaluated by Neer score standard.ResultsThe operation time was 45-127 minutes, with an average of 82.3 minutes. The intraoperative blood loss was 30-125 mL, with an average of 62.7 mL. Intraoperative fluoroscopy was performed 30-69 times, with an average of 37.0 times. The hospital stay was 6-23 days, with an average of 10.3 days. All incisions healed by first intention. All patients were followed up 12-37 months, with an average of 18.3 months. X-ray film re-examination showed that all fractures healed, the healing time was 12-21 weeks, with an average of 14.3 weeks. After operation, 3 cases had shoulder stiffness and 1 case had fracture malunion. At last follow-up, the Neer score of shoulder joint function was 49-97, with an average of 83.1. Among them, 38 cases were excellent, 13 cases were good, 10 cases were fair, and 3 cases were poor. The excellent and good rate was 79.7%. The excellent and good rate of patients with two-part fractures was 82.1% (23/28), and the excellent and good rate of patients with three-part fractures was 77.8% (28/36).ConclusionThe “door-shaft method” not only reduces the difficulty of the Joystick technique in the reduction of proximal humerus fractures, but also provides auxiliary stability. It is used for limited open reduction and internal fixation with locking plate to treat the two- and three-part fractures of the proximal humerus, which can achieve good effectiveness.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical results of locking-plate with an intramedullary fibular allograft for type C2 proximal humeral fracture fixation. MethodsBetween January 2011 and August 2012, 16 patients with proximal humeral fractures (AO type C2) were treated by locking-plate with an intramedullary fibular allograft. The clinical data were retrospectively analysed. There were 5 males and 11 females with an average age of 64 years (range, 55-70 years). The injury causes were falling injury in 12 cases, traffic accident injury in 3 cases, and sports injury in 1 case. The duration between injury and operation ranged from 2 to 6 days (mean, 4.5 days). The imaging data were used to judge the fracture healing, and to measure the neck-shaft angle and the height of humeral head; the disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score, short-form 36 health survey scale (SF-36), and Neer score were used to evaluate the function of the shoulder after surgery. ResultsPrimary healing of incision was obtained in all patients; no complication of vascular and nerve injury occurred. Sixteen cases were followed up 12-24 months (mean, 18 months). All fractures healed at 18-24 weeks (mean, 20 weeks). No complication occurred as follows:re-displacement, necrosis, rejection reaction, and loosening or extraction of screws. At last follow-up, the neck-shaft angle was 126.6-136.9° (mean, 132.5°), showing a little lost when compared with intraoperative angle (130.5-138.0°, 134.0° on average). At 12 months after surgery, the height loss of humeral head was 1.8-4.6 mm (mean, 2.0 mm); the passive anteflexion of the shoulder was 130-160° (mean, 148°); the active anteflexion was 120-145° (mean, 136°); the external rotation was 30-65° (mean, 56°); the internal rotation was 15-25° (mean, 19°). And the DASH score was 2-53 (mean, 12); the SF-36 score was 50-95 (mean, 89). According to Neer score for shoulder function, the results were excellent in 10 cases, good in 4 cases, fair in 1 case, and poor in 1 case, with an excellent and good rate of 87.5%. ConclusionLocking-plate with an intramedullary fibular allograft for type C2 proximal humeral fracture fixation has satisfactory clinical results because of stable fixation, high clinical outcome scores, and low internal fixation failure.
ObjectiveTo review the research progress on intra-articular screw penetration in proximal humeral fracture treated with locking plate. MethodsThe domestic and foreign literature about the proximal humeral fracture treated with locking plate was extensively reviewed. The incidence of screw penetration and risk factors were summarized from both primary and secondary screw penetrations, and the reasons of the intra-articular screw penetration and the technical solutions to avoid the penetration were analyzed. ResultsThe incidence of intra-articular screw penetration is about 11%-30%, which includes primary and secondary screw penetrations. The primary screw penetration is related to improper operation, inaccurate measurement, and “Steinmetz solid” effect, which results in inadequate fluoroscopy and blind zone. The secondary screw penetration is related to the loss of reduction and varus, collapse, and necrosis of the humeral head. The risk factors for intra-articular screw penetration include the bone mass density, the fracture type, the quality of fracture reduction, the applied location, number, and length of the plate and screws, and whether medial column buttress is restored. Improved fracture reduction, understanding the geometric distribution of screws, good intraoperative fluoroscopy, and reconstruction of medial column buttress stability are the key points for success. ConclusionThe risk of the intra-articular screw penetration in the proximal humeral fractures treated with locking plates is still high. Follow-up studies need to further clarify the cause and mechanism of screw penetration, and the risk factors that lead to screw penetration, in order to effectively prevent the occurrence of this complication.
ObjectiveTo review the literature about the clinical application and research progress on medial support augmentation of plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures, and to provide reference for clinical treatment.MethodsThe literature concerning medial support augmentation of plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures in recent years was extensively reviewed, as well as the biomechanical benefit and clinical advantage were analyzed thoroughly.ResultsMedial support augmentation of plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures is very important, especially in osteoporotic and/or comminuted fractures. Many medial support augmentation methods have been proposed which can be divided into extramedullary support and intramedullary support. It can also be divided into autogenous bone support and allogenic bone support according to the material and source, divided into medial column support, calcar support, and humeral head support according to the support site, and divided into fibular shaft support, femoral head support, anatomic fibula support according to the shape of the augmented fixation. At present, clinical and biomechanical researches show that medial support augmentation is an effective treatment for proximal humeral fractures.ConclusionAs an important treatment strategy for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures, the medial support augmentation of plate osteosynthesis gets the focus from the biomechanical studies and clinical treatment. However, there are still widespread controversies among orthopedic surgeons regarding the support mode, site, implant shape, and material of medial column support for augmentation of proximal humeral fractures. More high-quality clinical trials and biomechanical researches as well as multi-disciplinary integration, are needed to provide better strategy treatment for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures.
ObjectiveTo assess the effect of surgical treatment or conservative treatment on the clinical outcomes for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. MethodsWe searched CNKI (between January 1979 and April 2014), Wanfang Data (between January 1982 and April 2014), Medline (between January 1946 and April 2014), PubMed (between January 1966 and April 2014), Embase (between January 1974 and April 2014) and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (between January 2005 and April 2014) for randomized controlled trials comparing surgical treatment and conservative treatment for displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. The data were extracted and a Meta-analysis was made using RevMan 5.2. ResultsFive randomized controlled trials with a total of 226 patients were accepted in this Meta-analysis. The differences of Constant scores[WMD=0.48, 95%CI (-4.39, 5.35), P=0.85], incidences of avascular necrosisr of the humeral head[RR=0.66, 95%CI (0.37, 1.16), P=0.15], incidences of nonunion[RR=0.56, 95%CI (0.20, 1.58), P=0.27], incidences of osteoarthritis[RR=0.35, 95%CI (0.10, 1.22), P=0.10] between the two groups were not statistically different. The difference of incidences of additional surgery after primary treatment was statistically significant[RR=3.52, 95%CI (1.18, 10.45), P=0.02]. ConclusionThe results does not support the surgical treatment to improve the shoulder function when compared with conservative treatment for treating elderly patients with displaced 3-part or 4-part proximal humeral fractures. But surgical treatment increases the incidence of additional surgery after primary treatment. Considering surgery can increase the trauma and economic burden of patients, so the conservative treatment is suggested.
Objective To evaluate the cl inical significance of minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) appl ied in Neer II, III parts fractures of proximal humeraus. Methods The cl inical data were retrospectively analyzed, from 30 patients with Neer II, III parts fractures of proximal humeraus in accordance with selection criteria, who were treated with manual reduction and plaster external fixation (11 cases, non-operative group) or with MIPPO (19 cases, operative group) between January 2008 and May 2010. In non-operative group, there were 6 males and 5 females with an average age of 60 years (range, 56-80 years) and with an average time of 10 hours (range, 3-24 hours) between injury and reduction, including 8 cases of Neer II and 3 cases of Neer III. In operative group, there were 13 males and 6 females with anaverage age of 65 years (range, 45-78 years) and with an average time of 3 days (range, 1-5 days) between injury and operation, including 9 cases of Neer II and 10 cases of Neer III. There was no significant difference in gender, age, fracture type, and time from injury to operation (P gt; 0.05). The shoulder joint function before and after treatments was evaluated according to Constant-Murley Score (CMS) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons’ Form (ASES) scoring systems. Results Thirty patients were followed up. In operative group, the follow-up time ranged from 11 to 18 months (mean, 12 months); all incisions healed by first intention with no compl ication of internal fixation failure, infection, or nerve injury. In non-operative group, the follow-up time ranged from 9 to 15 months (mean, 11 months). The X-ray films showed that fractures healed without humeral head necrosis in 2 groups. The bone heal ing time in operative group and non-operative group was (11.47 ± 2.48) weeks and (11.82 ± 2.44) weeks, respectively, showing no significant difference (t=0.369, P=0.889). The CMS score and ASES score at each time point after treatment were significantly better than those before treatment (P lt; 0.05); the CMS scores in operative group were better than those in non-operative group at 3 weeks, 3 months, and 1 year after treatment (P lt; 0.05); and the ASES score in operative group was better than that in non-operative group at 3 weeks and 3 months after treatment (P lt; 0.05), but no significant difference was found at 1 year after treatment (P gt; 0.05). Conclusion MIPPO fixation using the locking compression plate is an effective option for Neer II, III parts fractures of proximal humeraus. It can provide good functional recovery of the shoulder joint so that patients can get back to their normal l ife as soon as possible.
Objective To compare the effectiveness between operative and non-operative treatment for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. Methods Between January 2009 and January 2011, 35 patients with 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures were treated with open reduction and locking plate internal fixation (n=20, operative group) and with closed reduction and splint or cast fixation (n=15, non-operative group). There was no significant difference in gender, age, etiology, fracture type, and disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The postoperative rehabilitation protocol was performed in 2 groups. Results All patients of the operative group achieved healing of incision by first intention. All patients were followed up 16 months on average (range, 12-20 months). The X-ray films showed that the other fractures healed except 1 case (5.0%) nonunion in operative group. Varus malunion was found in 1 case (6.7%) of non-operative group and 2 cases (10.0%) of operative group. Humeral head necrosis was found in 1 case respectively in 2 groups (5.0% and 6.7%). There was no significant difference in complication incidence between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). The Constant-Murley scores of non-operative group and operative group were 64.7 ± 9.9 and 66.8 ± 11.8 at last follow-up respectively, showing no significant difference (t=0.59, P=0.47). Conclusion Operative treatment has similar effectiveness to non-operative treatment for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. In elderly patients, non-operative treatment should be chosen.
Objective To evaluate the cl inical and radiological outcomes of minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis (MIPO) with locking compression plate (LCP) in the treatment of proximal humeral shaft fracture. Methods From July 2004 to April 2008, 26 patients with displaced fractures of the proximal humeral shaft were recruited, including 8 males and 18 females. Age of patients averaged 66 years old (range, 34-82 years old). According to AO classification, there were 4 cases of type A1, 2 cases of type A2, 8 cases of type B1, 4 cases of type B2, 2 cases of type B3, 4 cases of type C1 and 2 cases of type C2. The time from injury to surgery averaged 2 days (range, 1-5 days). There were 8 osteoporotic fractures. Results All surgical wound healed primarily, and there was no wound infection. Three patients had postoperative radial nerve neurapraxia, which recovered at 4, 6, 8 months respectively. All patients were followed up for 6-24 months with an average of 14.1 months. Radiological examination revealed bony union within 6 months in 25 cases. There was 1 delayed union which remained asymptomatic and eventually healed at 8 months with acceptable Constant-Murley score. There were 3 cases of shoulder impingement syndrome diagnosed at 3 months post-operatively. After implant removal, they all achieved an acceptable Constant-Murley score. According to Constant-Murley scoring system, there were 11 excellent, 10 good and 5 acceptable results. The excellent or good rate was 80.8%. Conclusion MIPO technique using LCP is an effective method to treat proximal humeral shaft fractures, which facil itates functional recovery of the shoulder joint. During the surgery, it is important to achieve a good fracture reduction and to avoid compl ications.
ObjectiveTo observe the influence of different humeral neck-shaft angle on the efficacy in the treatment of proximal humeral fractures with locking plate. MethodsA total of 106 patients with proximal humeral fractures were treated by locking plate between March 2009 and March 2013, and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Of 106 cases, 58 were male and 48 were female, aged from 26 to 71 years (mean, 52.3 years). The causes were traffic accident injury in 54 cases, falling injury from height in 23 cases, falling injury in 21 cases, and others in 8 cases. According to the Neer classification, there were 32 cases of two-part fractures, 65 cases of three-part fractures, and 9 cases of four-part fractures. The time from injury to operation was 1-7 days (mean, 2.7 days). According to neck-shaft angle by X-ray measurements at 1-3 days after operation, the patients were divided into 3 groups:valgus group (>145°), normal group (126-145°), and varus group (<126°) to observe the influence of neck-shaft angle on efficacy. ResultsAccording to postoperative humeral neck-shaft angle, there were 10 cases in valgus group, 75 cases in normal group, and 21 cases in varus group. There was no significant difference in general clinical data among 3 groups (P>0.05). The patients were followed up 6-12 months. The X-ray results showed fracture healing, and no significant difference was found in fracture healing time among 3 groups (P>0.05). After 6 months, the varus angle of femoral head and visual analogue scale (VAS) score of normal group were significantly lower than those of valgus group and varus group (P<0.05). The excellent and good rate of Constant-Murley score was 78.67% (59/75) in normal group, and it was significantly higher than that in valgus group (60.00%, 6/10) and varus group (42.86%, 9/21) (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between valgus group and varus group (P>0.05). The complication rate was 28.57% (6/21) in varus group, was 10.67% (8/75) in normal group, and was 20.00% (2/10) in valgus group, showing no significant difference among 3 groups (χ2=4.31, P=0.12). ConclusionReconstruction of normal neck-shaft angle is the key to good shoulder function and clinical efficacy in the treatment of proximal humeral fracture.