Literature DB >> 25038969

Comparison between reverse shoulder arthroplasty and Humerusblock in three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures in elderly patients.

Reinhold Ortmaier1, Georg Mattiassich, Matthias Pumberger, Wolfgang Hitzl, Philipp Moroder, Alexander Auffarth, Herbert Resch.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We set out to compare osteosynthesis using the minimally invasive, semi-rigid, Humerusblock to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for primary fracture treatment in three- and four-part fractures in patients over 65 years old.
METHODS: In the study period from 2008 to 2011, we conducted a matched-pair analysis of 25 patients treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (group 1) to 25 patients treated with the Humerusblock (group 2). At the time of follow-up, a complete physical examination of the shoulders, including evaluation with the Constant-Murley score and the VAS pain scale, was performed. In addition, standard radiographs (true AP and axillary views) were taken to evaluate signs of malreduction, malunion, nonunion, scapular notching or radiolucent lines around the prosthesis.
RESULTS: After a minimum follow-up of 12 months, the mean CMS differed significantly between groups 1 and 2 (47.4 vs 64.4, p<0.01). The mean abduction (97.6° vs 126.8°, p<0.01), anterior flexion (103.2° vs 139.6°, p<0.01) and external rotation (16° vs 39.6°; p<0.01) were significantly worse in group 1. The VAS pain score was significantly lower in group 2 compared to group 1 (0.92 vs 3.12, p<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that compared the Humerusblock to reverse shoulder arthroplasty for primary fracture treatment. In this study, the functional outcome was superior in the Humerusblock group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25038969     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2433-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  35 in total

1.  Update in the epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Mika Palvanen; Pekka Kannus; Seppo Niemi; Jari Parkkari
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of proximal humeral fractures in older adults: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ana Mata-Fink; Mary Meinke; Charlene Jones; Bokyung Kim; John-Erik Bell
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 3.019

3.  Closed reduction and minimally invasive percutaneous fixation of proximal humerus fractures using the Humerusblock.

Authors:  Alexander Brunner; Knut Weller; Sebastian Thormann; Jens-Arne Jöckel; Reto Babst
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 2.512

4.  Comparison of hemiarthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients.

Authors:  Derek J Cuff; Derek R Pupello
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  The PHILOS plate for proximal humeral fractures--risk factors for complications at one year.

Authors:  Christian Spross; Andreas Platz; Kaspar Rufibach; Thomas Lattmann; Jens Forberger; Michael Dietrich
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 3.313

Review 6.  Comparison of hemiarthroplasty and reverse arthroplasty for treatment of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review.

Authors:  Surena Namdari; John G Horneff; Keith Baldwin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  The importance of medial support in locked plating of proximal humerus fractures.

Authors:  Michael J Gardner; Yoram Weil; Joseph U Barker; Bryan T Kelly; David L Helfet; Dean G Lorich
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.512

Review 8.  Epidemiology of proximal humerus fractures managed in a trauma center.

Authors:  A Roux; L Decroocq; S El Batti; N Bonnevialle; G Moineau; C Trojani; P Boileau; F de Peretti
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 2.256

9.  Fracture displacement and screw cutout after open reduction and locked plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures [corrected].

Authors:  Kevin C Owsley; John T Gorczyca
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  The amount of humeral head impaction of proximal humeral fractures fixed with the Humerusblock device.

Authors:  Stefano Carbone; Philipp Moroder; Valerio Arceri; Roberto Postacchini; Stefano Gumina
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.075

View more
  7 in total

1.  Decision making in displaced fractures of the proximal humerus: fracture or surgeon based?

Authors:  Gertraud Gradl; Matthias Knobe; Hans-Christoph Pape; Paul Valentin Neuhaus; David Ring; Thierry Guitton
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-12-14       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Displaced three and four part proximal humeral fractures: prospective controlled randomized open-label two-arm study comparing intramedullary nailing and locking plate.

Authors:  Patrick Boyer; Camille Couffignal; Mohammad Bahman; Guy Mylle; Marc-Antoine Rousseau; Ruben Dukan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-09-23       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Clinical outcomes of cemented vs. uncemented reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review.

Authors:  David S Kao; Omar A Protzuk; Robert S O'Connell
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-10-02

4.  Minimally Invasive Treatment of Displaced Proximal Humeral Fractures in Patients Older Than 70 Years Using the Humerusblock.

Authors:  Robert Bogner; Reinhold Ortmaier; Philipp Moroder; Stefanie Karpik; Christof Wutte; Stefan Lederer; Alexander Auffarth; Herbert Resch
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  Treatment of humerus fractures in the elderly: A systematic review covering effectiveness, safety, economic aspects and evolution of practice.

Authors:  Cecilia Mellstrand Navarro; Agneta Brolund; Carl Ekholm; Emelie Heintz; Emin Hoxha Ekström; Per Olof Josefsson; Lina Leander; Peter Nordström; Lena Zidén; Karin Stenström
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 6.  The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part I.

Authors:  Sarav S Shah; Benjamin T Gaal; Alexander M Roche; Surena Namdari; Brian M Grawe; Macy Lawler; Stewart Dalton; Joseph J King; Joshua Helmkamp; Grant E Garrigues; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch; Kyle Flik; Randall J Otto; Richard Jones; Andrew Jawa; Peter McCann; Joseph Abboud; Gabe Horneff; Glen Ross; Richard Friedman; Eric T Ricchetti; Douglas Boardman; Robert Z Tashjian; Lawrence V Gulotta
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-09-07

Review 7.  The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part II.

Authors:  Sarav S Shah; Alexander M Roche; Spencer W Sullivan; Benjamin T Gaal; Stewart Dalton; Arjun Sharma; Joseph J King; Brian M Grawe; Surena Namdari; Macy Lawler; Joshua Helmkamp; Grant E Garrigues; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch; Kyle Flik; Randall J Otto; Richard Jones; Andrew Jawa; Peter McCann; Joseph Abboud; Gabe Horneff; Glen Ross; Richard Friedman; Eric T Ricchetti; Douglas Boardman; Robert Z Tashjian; Lawrence V Gulotta
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-09-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.