Literature DB >> 21416205

Three- and four-part fractures have poorer function than one-part proximal humerus fractures.

Crispin Ong1, Christopher Bechtel, Michael Walsh, Joseph D Zuckerman, Kenneth A Egol.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Locking plates have become a commonly used fixation device in the operative treatment of three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures. Examining function in patients treated nonoperatively and operatively should help determine whether and when surgery is appropriate in these difficult-to-treat fractures. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared functional scores, ROM, and radiographs in patients with one-part proximal humerus fractures treated nonoperatively to those in patients with displaced three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures treated with open reduction and internal fixation using locking plates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 142 patients with proximal humerus fractures treated with a standardized treatment algorithm over a 6-year period. Three- and four-part fractures were treated surgically while one-part fractures were treated nonoperatively. Functional scores, ROM, and radiographs were used to evaluate outcomes. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and SF-36 scores were obtained at 12 months. Of the 142 patients, 101 (51 with three- or four-part fractures and 50 with one-part fractures) had a minimum followup of 12 months (average, 19 months; range, 12-64 months).
RESULTS: The fractures united in all patients. At 1 year, the patients with one-part fractures had better SF-36 physical and mental scores and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores than the three- and four-part fractures. Both groups had similar shoulder ROM. Nine patients treated operatively had complications, four of which were related to screw penetration into the joint.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with three- and four-part fractures should be advised of the likelihood of persistent functional impairment and a relatively higher risk of complications when treated operatively with locked plates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21416205      PMCID: PMC3210284          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1864-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  29 in total

1.  Internal fixation of complex fractures of the proximal humerus.

Authors:  C Gerber; C M L Werner; P Vienne
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2004-08

2.  Proximal humeral fractures. Late results in relation to classification and treatment.

Authors:  B Kristiansen; S W Christensen
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1987-04

3.  Displaced proximal humeral fractures. Part I. Classification and evaluation. By Charles S. Neer, I, 1970.

Authors:  C S Neer
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Complications about the glenohumeral joint related to the use of screws and staples.

Authors:  J D Zuckerman; F A Matsen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Open reduction and internal fixation of three and four-part fractures of the proximal part of the humerus.

Authors:  A J Wijgman; W Roolker; T W Patt; E L F B Raaymakers; R K Marti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Epidemiology of fracture of the upper end of the humerus.

Authors:  J Horak; B E Nilsson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1975-10       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Corticosteroid-induced osteonecrosis of the humeral head.

Authors:  R L Cruess
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 2.472

8.  Surgical treatment of three and four-part proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Brian D Solberg; Charles N Moon; Dennis P Franco; Guy D Paiement
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  [The angle stable locking-proximal-humerus-plate (LPHP) for proximal humeral fractures using a small anterior-lateral-deltoid-splitting-approach - technique and first results].

Authors:  H Lill; P Hepp; T Rose; K König; C Josten
Journal:  Zentralbl Chir       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 0.942

10.  Fractures of the neck of the humerus: a review of the late results.

Authors:  P C Clifford
Journal:  Injury       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 2.586

View more
  3 in total

1.  Correlation between classification and secondary screw penetration in proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Qiuke Wang; Yu Zhu; Yifei Liu; Lei Wang; Yunfeng Chen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-06       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 2.  Predictors of outcomes of proximal humerus fractures in children and adolescents: A systematic review.

Authors:  Samuel Abbot; Susanna Proudman; Bhuvanesh Ravichandran; Nicole Williams
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2022-08-16       Impact factor: 1.917

3.  Treatment of proximal humeral fractures using anatomical locking plate: correlation of functional and radiographic results.

Authors:  Antonio Carlos Tenor Junior; Alisson Martins Granja Cavalcanti; Bruno Mota Albuquerque; Fabiano Rebouças Ribeiro; Miguel Pereira da Costa; Rômulo Brasil Filho
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2016-04-19
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.