DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Efficacy of Additive Trans-cuff Augmentation Sutures for Proximal Humeral Fractures Stabilized by Locking Plates in Elderly Patients

  • Cho, Nam Su (Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine) ;
  • Shim, Hee Seok (Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Sang Hyeon (Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jeon, Jong Wook (Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine) ;
  • Rhee, Yong Girl (Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyung Hee University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2014.10.02
  • Accepted : 2014.12.13
  • Published : 2015.06.30

Abstract

Background: The purpose of our study was to evaluate the functional and radiologic outcomes of additive augmentation sutures through rotator cuff for proximal humeral fractures stabilized locking plate in elderly patients. Methods: We enrolled 74 patients over the age of 60 years who received internal fixation using locking plates for proximal humeral fractures. Of these, 50 patients had additive augmentation sutures through rotator cuff. The mean age at the time of surgery was 72.1 years (range, 60-89 years), and the mean follow-up period was 17.5 months (range, 12-62 months). The humeral neck-shaft angle and humeral head height were used as radiological markers to assess the effect of additive augmentation sutures through rotator cuff. We allocated the patients who received additive augmentation sutures into group A and those who did not into group B. Results: At the final follow-up, the mean Korean Showlder Society score and Constant scores were $88.96{\pm}12.1$ and $86.6{\pm}11.9$, respectively, in group A and $86.21{\pm}11.8$ and $85.3{\pm}11.7$, respectively, in group B (p=0.368, 0.271). At the final follow-up, the mean loss in humeral neck-shaft angle from the time of immediate postoperative measurement was $1.6^{\circ}$ in group A and $4.8^{\circ}$ in group B, whereas the mean loss in humeral head height was 0.82 mm in group A and 0.52 mm in group B (p=0.029, 0.178). Conclusions: The surgical outcomes of internal fixation using locking plates for proximal humeral fractures were clinically and radiologically good in elderly patients over the age of 60 years without any observable complications. Further, the loss of humeral head shaft angle at the final follow-up from its initial postoperative measurement was significantly smaller in patients who received an additive augmentation suture than in those who did not. Thus, we conclude that augmentation sutures are a beneficial option for elderly patients that clinicians can consider at the time of surgical decision making.

Keywords

References

  1. Palvanen M, Kannus P, Niemi S, Parkkari J. Update in the epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;442:87-92. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000194672.79634.78
  2. Court-Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: a review. Injury. 2006;37(8):691-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.130
  3. Neer CS 2nd. Displaced proximal humeral fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1970;52(6):1077-89. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-197052060-00001
  4. Cornell CN. Tension-band wiring supplemented by lag-screw fixation of proximal humerus fractures: a modified technique. Orthop Rev. 1994;Suppl:19-23.
  5. Hintermann B, Trouillier HH, Schafer D. Rigid internal fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus in older patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82(8):1107-12. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.82B8.10330
  6. Jaberg H, Warner JJ, Jakob RP. Percutaneous stabilization of unstable fractures of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(4):508-15. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199274040-00006
  7. Schippinger G, Szyszkowitz R, Seibert FJ. Current concepts in the treatment of proximal humeral fractures. Curr Orthop. 1997;11(3):203-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-0890(97)90035-9
  8. Robinson CM, Amin AK, Godley KC, Murray IR, White TO. Modern perspectives of open reduction and plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2011;25(10):618-29. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e31821c0a2f
  9. Aggarwal S, Bali K, Dhillon MS, Kumar V, Mootha AK. Displaced proximal humeral fractures: an Indian experience with locking plates. J Orthop Surg Res. 2010;5:60. https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-5-60
  10. Plecko M, Kraus A. Internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures using the locking proximal humerus plate. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2005;17(1):25-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-005-1120-8
  11. Agudelo J, Schürmann M, Stahel P, et al. Analysis of efficacy and failure in proximal humerus fractures treated with locking plates. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21(10):676-81. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e31815bb09d
  12. Gardner MJ, Lorich DG, Werner CM, Helfet DL. Secondgeneration concepts for locked plating of proximal humerus fractures. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2007;36(9):460-5.
  13. Gardner MJ, Weil Y, Barker JU, Kelly BT, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. The importance of medial support in locked plating of proximal humerus fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21(3):185-91. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3180333094
  14. Rose PS, Adams CR, Torchia ME, Jacofsky DJ, Haidukewych GG, Steinmann SP. Locking plate fixation for proximal humeral fractures: initial results with a new implant. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(2):202-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.06.006
  15. Edwards SL, Wilson NA, Zhang LQ, Flores S, Merk BR. Twopart surgical neck fractures of the proximal part of the humerus. A biomechanical evaluation of two fixation techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(10):2258-64. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00757
  16. Sudkamp N, Bayer J, Hepp P, et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximal humerus plate. Results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(6):1320-8. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00006
  17. Schliemann B, Siemoneit J, Theisen Ch, Kosters C, Weimann A, Raschke MJ. Complex fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly: outcome and complications after locking plate fixation. Musculoskelet Surg. 2012;96 Suppl 1:S3-11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-012-0181-8
  18. Jost B, Spross C, Grehn H, Gerber C. Locking plate fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus: analysis of complications, revision strategies and outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(4):542-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2012.06.008
  19. Liew AS, Johnson JA, Patterson SD, King GJ, Chess DG. Effect of screw placement on fixation in the humeral head. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2000;9(5):423-6. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2000.107089
  20. Smith AM, Mardones RM, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Early complications of operatively treated proximal humeral fractures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(1):14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.05.008
  21. Hente R, Kampshoff J, Kinner B, Fuchtmeier B, Nerlich M. Treatment of dislocated 3- and 4-part fractures of the proximal humerus with an angle-stabilizing fixation plate. Unfallchirurg. 2004;107(9):769-82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-004-0818-7
  22. Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;(214):160-4.
  23. Hertel R. Fractures of the proximal humerus in osteoporotic bone. Osteoporos Int. 2005;16 Suppl 2:S65-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-004-1714-2
  24. Kettler M, Biberthaler P, Braunstein V, Zeiler C, Kroetz M, Mutschler W. Treatment of proximal humeral fractures with the PHILOS angular stable plate. Presentation of 225 cases of dislocated fractures. Unfallchirurg. 2006;109(12):1032-40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00113-006-1165-7
  25. Egol KA, Ong CC, Walsh M, Jazrawi LM, Tejwani NC, Zuckerman JD. Early complications in proximal humerus fractures (OTA Types 11) treated with locked plates. J Orthop Trauma. 2008;22(3):159-64. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e318169ef2a
  26. Clavert P, Adam P, Bevort A, Bonnomet F, Kempf JF. Pitfalls and complications with locking plate for proximal humerus fracture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(4):489-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.09.005
  27. Nho SJ, Brophy RH, Barker JU, Cornell CN, MacGillivray JD. Management of proximal humeral fractures based on current literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89 Suppl 3:44-58. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00094
  28. Voigt C, Hurschler C, Rechi L, Vosshenrich R, Lill H. Additive fiber-cerclages in proximal humeral fractures stabilized by locking plates: no effect on fracture stabilization and rotator cuff function in human shoulder specimens. Acta Orthop. 2009;80(4):465-71. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453670903110659

Cited by

  1. Whatever Your Preference Is for the Treatment of the Proximal Humeral Fracture vol.20, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.5397/cise.2017.20.4.181