Greta Lorenz1, Wolfgang Schönthaler2, Wolfgang Huf3, Micha Komjati2, Christian Fialka2, Sandra Boesmueller2. 1. Department of Trauma Surgery, AUVA Trauma Center Vienna Meidling, Kundratstraße 37, 1120, Vienna, Austria. greta.lorenz@auva.at. 2. Department of Trauma Surgery, AUVA Trauma Center Vienna Meidling, Kundratstraße 37, 1120, Vienna, Austria. 3. Center for Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is still disagreement regarding the optimal surgical treatment of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. The aim of this monocentric, retrospective study was to compare the complication rate of internal fixation with a locking plate versus proximal humeral nailing after a one-year follow-up. METHODS: From 2005 to 2016, 292 patients suffered a fracture of the proximal humerus and were treated surgically at our level-I trauma center. According to the inclusion criteria, 50 patients were included in this study: 19 of these (11 three-part fractures and 8 four-part fractures) were treated with a proximal humeral nail (HN) and 31 (12 three-part fractures and 19 four-part fractures) with a locking plate (LP) osteosynthesis. Classification was performed according to the Hertel classification. At a 1-year follow-up, the complication rate of the two treatment methods was compared. RESULTS: Twenty patients (40%) suffered at least one complication. Of these, six patients (12%) were treated with a HN and 14 (28%) with a LP (p = 0.39). The most frequent complication was screw perforation (22%), followed by non-union (16%). Humeral head necrosis (10%) occurred only in the LP cohort. One wound infection occurred in a patient treated with a HN. Four-part fractures were treated more frequently with a LP. However, the difference was non-significant in this sample (p = 0.186). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study provide some evidence that in terms of complication rate, both treatment options are comparable for internal fixation of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. The type of fracture seems to be decisive for the choice of implant.
PURPOSE: There is still disagreement regarding the optimal surgical treatment of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. The aim of this monocentric, retrospective study was to compare the complication rate of internal fixation with a locking plate versus proximal humeral nailing after a one-year follow-up. METHODS: From 2005 to 2016, 292 patients suffered a fracture of the proximal humerus and were treated surgically at our level-I trauma center. According to the inclusion criteria, 50 patients were included in this study: 19 of these (11 three-part fractures and 8 four-part fractures) were treated with a proximal humeral nail (HN) and 31 (12 three-part fractures and 19 four-part fractures) with a locking plate (LP) osteosynthesis. Classification was performed according to the Hertel classification. At a 1-year follow-up, the complication rate of the two treatment methods was compared. RESULTS: Twenty patients (40%) suffered at least one complication. Of these, six patients (12%) were treated with a HN and 14 (28%) with a LP (p = 0.39). The most frequent complication was screw perforation (22%), followed by non-union (16%). Humeral head necrosis (10%) occurred only in the LP cohort. One wound infection occurred in a patient treated with a HN. Four-part fractures were treated more frequently with a LP. However, the difference was non-significant in this sample (p = 0.186). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study provide some evidence that in terms of complication rate, both treatment options are comparable for internal fixation of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. The type of fracture seems to be decisive for the choice of implant.
Authors: F Gadea; L Favard; P Boileau; C Cuny; T d'Ollone; D Saragaglia; F Sirveaux Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2016-11-03 Impact factor: 2.256
Authors: Ana Paula Cortes de Oliveira; Mariana Christovam Mestieri; José Carlos Baldocchi Pontin Journal: Acta Ortop Bras Date: 2015 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 0.513
Authors: G Boudard; G Pomares; L Milin; I Lemonnier; H Coudane; D Mainard; J-P Delagoutte Journal: Orthop Traumatol Surg Res Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 2.256
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
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
Authors: Rony-Orijit Dey Hazra; Karol Szewczyk; Alexander Ellwein; Robert Blach; Gunnar Jensen; Andreas Kühnapfel; Helmut Lill; Mara Warnhoff Journal: Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Date: 2022-05-27
Authors: Rony-Orijit Dey Hazra; Johanna Illner; Karol Szewczyk; Mara Warnhoff; Alexander Ellwein; Robert Maximillian Blach; Helmut Lill; Gunnar Jensen Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-01-14 Impact factor: 4.241