Literature DB >> 34977963

Treatment of proximal humerus fractures using reverse shoulder arthroplasty: do the inclination of the humeral component and the lateral offset of the glenosphere influence the clinical outcome and tuberosity healing?

Malte Holschen1,2, Maria Körting3, Patrick Khourdaji4, Benjamin Bockmann5, Tobias L Schulte5, Kai-Axel Witt3, Jörn Steinbeck3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The employment of reverse shoulder arthroplasty for dislocated proximal humerus fractures of elderly patients becomes increasingly relevant. The standard inclination angle of the humeral component was 155°. Lately, there is a trend towards smaller inclination angles of 145° or 135°. Additionally, there has been an increased focus on the lateralization of the glenosphere. This retrospective comparative study evaluates clinical and radiological results of patients treated for proximal humerus fractures by reverse shoulder arthroplasty with different inclination angles of the humeral component, which was either 135° or 155°. Additionally, a different lateral offset of the glenosphere, which was either 0 mm or 4 mm, was used.
METHODS: For this retrospective comparative analysis, 58 out of 66 patients treated by reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures were included. The minimum follow-up was 24 months. Thirty (m = 3, f = 27; mean age 78 years; mean FU 35 months, range 24-58 months) were treated with a standard 155° humeral component and a glenosphere without lateral offset (group A), while 28 patients (m = 2, f = 26; mean age 79 years; mean FU 30 months, range 24-46 months) were treated with a 135° humeral component and a glenosphere with a 4 mm lateral offset (group B). We determined range of motion, Constant score, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score as clinical outcomes and evaluated tuberosity healing as well as scapula notching.
RESULTS: Neither forward flexion (A = 128°, B = 121°; p = 0.710) nor abduction (A = 111°, B = 106°; p = 0.327) revealed differences between the groups. The mean Constant Score rated 63 in group A, while it was 61 in group B (p = 0.350). There were no differences of the ASES Score between the groups (A = 74, B = 72; p = 0.270). There was an increased risk for scapula notching in group A (47%) in comparison to group B (4%, p = 0.001). Healing of the greater tuberosity was achieved in 57% of group A and in 75% of group B (p = 0.142). The healing rate of the lesser tuberosity measured 33% in group A and 71% in group B (p = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Both inclination angles of the humeral component are feasible options for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures in elderly patients. Neither the inclination angle nor the lateral offset of the glenosphere seem to have a relevant influence on the clinical outcome. The healing rate of the lesser tuberosity was higher in implants with a decreased neck-shaft angle. There is an increased risk for scapula notching, if a higher inclination angle of the humeral component is chosen. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III. Retrospective comparative study.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Humeral inclination; Lateral offset; Proximal humerus fracture; Reverse shoulder arthroplasty; Scapular notching; Shoulder prosthesis; Tuberosity healing

Year:  2022        PMID: 34977963     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-021-04281-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  51 in total

Review 1.  Proximal humeral fractures: current concepts in classification, treatment and outcomes.

Authors:  I R Murray; A K Amin; T O White; C M Robinson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2011-01

2.  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

3.  Trends in epidemiology and patho-anatomical pattern of proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Christian Bahrs; Tanja Stojicevic; Stojicevic Tanja; Gunnar Blumenstock; Blumenstock Gunnar; Stig Brorson; Brorson Stig; Andreas Badke; Ulrich Stöckle; Stöckle Ulrich; Bernd Rolauffs; Rolauffs Bernd; Thomas Freude; Freude Thomas
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-05-25       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Grammont reversed prosthesis for acute complex fracture of the proximal humerus in an elderly population with 5 to 12 years follow-up.

Authors:  J-F Cazeneuve; D-J Cristofari
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2014-01-20       Impact factor: 2.256

5.  How the greater tuberosity affects clinical outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures.

Authors:  Xavier Ohl; Nicolas Bonnevialle; David Gallinet; Nassima Ramdane; Philippe Valenti; Lauryl Decroocq; Pascal Boileau
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2018-08-03       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  Long term functional outcome following reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the elderly.

Authors:  J-F Cazeneuve; D-J Cristofari
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2011-09-13       Impact factor: 2.256

7.  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

8.  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures. A blinded, randomized, controlled, prospective study.

Authors:  Emilio Sebastiá-Forcada; Román Cebrián-Gómez; Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla; Vicente Gil-Guillén
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2014-07-30       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 9.  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

Review 10.  Current concepts in locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures.

Authors:  Christoph J Laux; Florian Grubhofer; Clément M L Werner; Hans-Peter Simmen; Georg Osterhoff
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 2.359

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  [Current trends in reverse fracture arthroplasty].

Authors:  M Warnhoff; G Jensen; H Lill; A Ellwein
Journal:  Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-07-21

Review 2.  The Evolution of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Its Current Use in the Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Older Population.

Authors:  Gabriel Larose; Mandeep S Virk
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 4.964

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.