| Literature DB >> 26968940 |
Jan Theopold1, Bastian Marquaß2, Johannes Fakler2, Hanno Steinke3, Christoph Josten2, Pierre Hepp2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Complex proximal humerus fractures with metaphyseal comminution remain challenging regarding reduction and stability. In most fracture patterns the hard bone of the bicipital groove remains intact. In this case series, we describe a novel technique of hybrid double plate osteosynthesis of complex proximal humerus fractures with metaphyseal comminution.Entities:
Keywords: Double plate; Locked plate; Metaphyseal comminution; Proximal humerus fracture
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26968940 PMCID: PMC4788826 DOI: 10.1186/s12893-016-0125-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Surg ISSN: 1471-2482 Impact factor: 2.102
Fig. 1Basic principles of hybrid double plating. a the tubular plate fits into the bicipital groove in inverted fashion. b the locking plate (here: WinstaPH, Axomed, Freibung, Germany) is fixed laterally, c anatomy in a cadaver specimen showing exposure if the metaphyseal region, d the tubular plate is adjusted into the groove (+ greater tuberosity, * lesser tuberosity, BG bicipital groove, LB tendon of the long head of the biceps, MR metaphyseal region)
Fig. 2a a.p. view of a proximal humerus fracture with metaphyseal comminution (*) b intraoperative view showing the comminuted zone; long biceps tendon with loop (LB), metaphyseal region (MR) c, d the reduction is accomplished with the inverted tubular plate within the sulcus of the biceps tendon; bicipital groove (BG) e, f postoperative a.p. and y- radiograph with double plate configuration
Fig. 3a 24 year old male with dislocated proximal fracture with metaphyseal comminution and intermuscular fragment. b postoperative x-ray showing anatomical reduction after double plate osteosynthesis. c X-ray after one year showing complete healing of the fracture, x-ray after material removal. d functional result after 2 years, Constant 90 points
Overall characteristics and results of the seven patients with minimum 12 months follow-up
| Case no. | Age | Sex | OTA proximal segment classification | Fracture morphology | Follow-up (months) | Constant score (affected/unaffected side) | Shoulder range of motion | Cause of injury | Complications/Reoperation | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flexion | Abduction | Internal rotation | External rotation | |||||||||
| 1 | 24 | M | 11-B2.3 | DE | 13 | 94/96 | 170 | 180 | 90 | 90 | MVA | Material removal after 12 months |
| 2 | 65 | F | 11-C2.2 | DE, HS | 35 | 72/93 | 160 | 90 | 90 | 50 | F | |
| 3 | 73 | M | 11-C2.1 | DE, HS | 34 | 79/85 | 160 | 150 | 90 | 50 | F | |
| 4 | 39 | F | 11-C2.1 | DE, HS | 28 | 85/93 | 170 | 160 | 90 | 50 | BA | AVN, Screw perforation, frozen shoulder, 2 reoperations |
| 5 | 36 | M | 11-B2.3 | DE | 18 | 84/93 | 150 | 150 | 40 | 60 | FFH | |
| 6 | 63 | M | 11-C2.1 | DE, HS | 26 | 91/94 | 160 | 130 | 90 | 60 | BA | |
| 7 | 51 | F | 11-B2.3 | DE | 24 | 58/84 | 110 | 100 | 90 | 50 | F | Material removal after 13 months |
F female, M male, MVA motor vehicle accident, BA bicycle accident, FFH fall from high, F fall, DE proximal humerus fracture with diaphyseal extension or diaphyseal comminution, HS head-split variant, AVN avascular head necrosis