Hemiarthroplasty For Proximal Humeral Fractures Research Articles

Comparison of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty and Hemiarthroplasty for Proximal Humeral Fractures: What about Functional Outcome? Reverse versus Hemiarthroplasty in Shoulder Fractures

Purpose: Shoulder replacement becomes more indicated in complex fractures of the humeral head. Indications depend on some factors especially age and fracture’s pattern. The aim of our study is to compare the functional results of both reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) and hemi-arthroplasty (HA) in complex proximal humerus fractures. Materials and Methods: Fifty-two shoulder arthroplasties (20 reverse shoulder arthroplasties, 38 hemiarthroplasties), were reviewed retrospectively, between January 2010, and December, 2015. Preoperative, operative, and postoperative evaluations were achieved based on medical observations. At last follow-up, functional outcomes were established according Constant-Murley Score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Complications rates were well-defined and compared between the study groups. Results: The mean of follow-up was 41.5 months. Comparing the study groups, reverse shoulder arthrosplasties were significantly older (mean age: 76.3 versus 66). These fractures occur more in women (70% versus 57%). At last follow-up, functional outcomes were better in reverse shoulder arthroplasty group (Constant-Murley Score 76 versus 59; ASES score 56 versus 41). The mean anterior elevation and external rotation were better in reverse shoulder arthroplasty respectively (110°versus 88°; 28° versus 19°). Revision was more required in hemiarthroplasty group than reverse shoulder arthroplasty group. Conclusion: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty seems to improve functional outcome at intermediate and long-term of follow-up of proximal complex humeral fractures on comparison to hemiarthroplasty.

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures: analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes at midterm follow-up: a series of 51 patients.

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty has historically been the gold standard treatment for proximal humeral fractures not suitable to open reduction and internal fixation. In the last decades, reverse shoulder arthroplasty has gained more and more importance. Aim of this study is to retrospectively analyze subjective and objective outcomes of a group of consecutive patients. Fifty-one patients were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 18months (range 12-60). For all the cases, the same surgical technique was performed in all cases. Range of motion, Constant-Murley score, ponderate Constant-Murley score, visual analog score and a patients' self-assessment scale were calculated. Anatomic tuberosities healing, stem positioning or mobilization were evaluated on postoperative X-rays and follow-up CT-scans. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate a correlation between subjective and objective results. Thirty-five patients (75%) declared to be satisfied of the operated shoulder. The mean CMS was 50 (17-91), the mean pCMS 72 (16-111). The mean forward flexion measured was 98° (40°-170°), the mean external rotation with adducted arm 22° (0°-60°), the mean internal rotation at sacrum (gluteus-T12). Four implants needed revision. Forty-seven stems were correctly positioned; 84.3% of tuberosities was anatomic or low positioned and consolidated in 74.5% of cases. Statistical analysis revealed significant correlation between CMS, pCMS, VAS and subjective satisfaction and between anatomic tuberosities healing and 3-part fractures. HA implant is a valid and reliable technique for the treatment of proximal humeral fracture. From our data, patients' satisfaction depends upon pain relief more than upon restore of function.

Cement technique correlates with tuberosity healing in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture

Tuberosity healing correlates with clinical outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for 4-part proximal humeral fractures (4PHFs). We seek to examine variables that affect tuberosity healing. This was a retrospective comparative study. At 1 year postoperatively, patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty for 4PHFs were divided into 2 groups: those with anatomically healed tuberosities and those with tuberosity nonunion. The primary variables included time between injury and surgery, prosthesis fenestration, cement mantle classification, and both vertical and horizontal tuberosity reduction. Secondary demographic factors included age, gender, osteoporosis status, diabetes status, and smoking status. There were 84 individuals who met the inclusion criteria: 37 (44%) had anatomically healed tuberosities, and 47 (56%) did not. Individuals with anatomic healing had cement near or under the tuberosities 32% of the time, whereas individuals with nonunion or resorption had cement near the tuberosities 66% of the time (P = .002). There was no association between tuberosity healing and fenestration of the humeral stem (P = .84). Anatomic reduction between tuberosities was associated with healing (P <.001), whereas greater tuberosity-to-head height was not (P = .25). There were no significant differences in age, osteoporosis status, smoking status, diabetes status, or time to surgery between groups. Male patients had nearly double the rate of healing (P = .03). The classification and effect of cement technique on tuberosity healing have not previously been described. We suggest limiting cementation to a minimum of 5 mm below the level of the tuberosity fracture. The ideal candidate for hemiarthroplasty for a 4PHF is a male patient with anatomic tuberosity reduction and limited use of cement.

Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Trauma: does a Tuberosity Friendly Prosthesis Improve Outcome?

Reported outcomes of shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures have been poor due to tuberosity non-union or rotator cuff disruption. Newer designs provide features to allow secure tuberosity apposition and stabilisation. To evaluate the outcomes of a shoulder hemiarthroplasty system with "tuberosity friendly" features in the treatment of multi-fragmentary proximal humeral fractures. An analysis of 12 patients undergoing Exactech Equinoxe hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures over a two year period. Radiological and clinical outcomes were assessed. Twelve patients, aged 55 to 84, were examined. Median follow up was 20 months (range 7 to 31). Although tuberosity reduction remained and the tuberosities united radiologically in all cases, 5 patients went on to develop superior migration of the humeral head. The median Oxford shoulder score was 25.7 out of 48 (range 11 to 43). 1. A trauma hemiarthroplasty system combined with good surgical technique can ensure tuberosity fixation and subsequent union. 2. Superior migration of the prosthesis can still occur due to rotator cuff disruption. 3. The use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty may be more appropriate in elderly patients with multi-fragmentary proximal humeral fractures.

The outcome of hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures is dependent on the status of the rotator cuff.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes of hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures. Thirty-five patients (33 women and two men), average age at the time of surgery of 75.1 (range, 64-92) years, who underwent hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fracture or fracture-dislocation of the shoulder were enrolled in this study. The Constant score was used for clinical evaluation of outcomes, and X-rays were performed after a minimum follow-up period of 12 months postoperatively. Parameters for radiological evaluation were as follows: value of acromiohumeral interval (AHI), humeral offset, medial and lateral projection, and the existence of subacromial spur, a radiolucent zone around humeral stem and an osteolytic change of the greater tuberosity. The average follow-up after surgery was 45.8 (range, 13-114) months. The average postoperative Constant score was 76.2 (range, 53-96) points. The mean values of AHI and humeral offset were 8.4 and 28.3 mm, respectively. A subacromial spur was observed in ten patients, and an osteolytic change of the greater tuberosity in seven patients. There was a significant correlation between Constant score and values of AHI or humeral offset. The Constant score in patients with a subacromial spur or radiolucent zone around humeral stem was markedly lower than that in patients without them. The clinical outcome of hemiarthroplasty was influenced by factors reflecting function and conditions of the rotator cuff. Anatomical reconstruction and bone union of the tuberosities need to ensure clinical success in hemiarthroplasty.

Can surgeons predict what makes a good hemiarthroplasty for fracture?

The purposes of this study were (1) to identify the risk factors for tuberosity complications and poor functional outcomes and (2) to compare a standard humeral stem with a fracture-specific humeral stem in hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. We retrospectively reviewed the cases of 60 consecutively operated patients (61 shoulders) using radiographs and computed tomography scans. There were 56 displaced four-part and 5 three-part fractures. The technique was standardized for prosthesis positioning in height and retroversion and for tuberosity fixation. A conventional standard stem was implanted in the first 31 shoulders (group A), and a specific fracture stem was implanted in the next 30 shoulders (group B). The sample size needed for comparison was predetermined with an a priori power analysis. The mean follow-up period was 64 months (range, 24 to 150 months). At the last follow-up, the greater tuberosity was healed in an adequate (anatomic) position in 45% of the patients in group A (14 of 31) and 87% of those in group B (26 of 30) (P = .0001). Active forward elevation, active external rotation, and the Constant score were significantly better with fracture stems (136°, 34°, and 68 points, respectively) than with conventional stems (113°, 23°, and 58 points, respectively) (P < .0001). Regardless of the type of implant used, patients aged 75 years or older and women had significantly lower functional results and higher rates of tuberosity complications (P < .0001). Good functional outcomes can be anticipated after hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures if the greater tuberosity is anatomically positioned (ie, lateral to the stem) and healed around the prosthesis. The use of a specific fracture stem allows to double the rate of tuberosity healing compared to a conventional stem (87% vs. 45%), decreases complications and improves shoulder function. Risk factors associated with poor functional results and anatomic failures are (1) patient age (≥75 years), (2) patient gender (women), and (3) use of a conventional (bulky) stem.

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures: comparisons between the deltopectoral and anterolateral deltoid-splitting approaches

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty is a widely accepted method for treating complex proximal humeral fractures, and the deltopectoral approach is the most popular route for this procedure. The purpose of the current study was to define and compare outcomes of shoulder hemiarthroplasty when using deltopectoral or anterolateral deltoid-splitting approaches. Two cohorts of patients were compared for clinical and radiographic outcomes at the same postoperative follow-up periods: a deltopectoral group (DP group) of 15 patients, from November 2004 to April 2007, and an anterolateral deltoid-splitting group (DS group) of 17 patients, from May 2007 to December 2009. Pain scores, goniometric measurements of the range of motion, and Constant scores were recorded for clinical assessment. Radiographic evaluations were recorded for stem osteolysis, tuberosity absorption, joint subluxation, and acromiohumeral distance. The 2 groups did not differ significantly in demographic data, preoperative fracture classification, surgical timing, early postoperative radiographic findings, and 2-year radiographic results. The DS group had less immediate postoperative pain (P=.025). At the 2-year follow-up assessment, the groups did not difference significantly in shoulder abduction and forward flexion. All prostheses survived until the 2-year assessment. When performing shoulder hemiarthroplasty for complex proximal humeral fractures, we found that the anterolateral deltoid-splitting approach provides an easier route for assessing posterior fracture fragments and managing rotator cuff tissue. The anterolateral deltoid-splitting approach was shown to be an acceptable alternative route for shoulder hemiarthroplasty than the standard deltopectoral approach.

Reverse the Trend for Proximal Humeral Fractures: A Review of the Evidence for the Use of Reverse Shoulder Replacement in Acute Trauma

Background Proximal humeral fractures in the elderly population represent a particularly demanding subset of fractures. These have been traditionally treated with Hemi-arthroplasty (HA). Recently there has been a trend towards using a Reverse shoulder replacement (RSR) in some of these patients. The primary aim of the study was to systematically review the literature on the functional outcome scores for RSR in proximal humeral fractures and compare it with the best quality literature available for HA. Secondarily to compare range of movement, complication rates, re-operation rates and x-ray changes. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed using the keywords: Delta, inverse, shoulder, trauma, and fracture. Only studies with 10 patients or more, presenting new data on the functional outcome scores of RSR for acute trauma were included. Studies reporting the use of RSR for fracture sequalae were excluded. These results were compared to the most comprehensive and up to date literature available for HA for proximal humeral fractures. Results Eight papers met the full inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data was available for 178 patients with a minimum follow-up of only 3 months. The mean absolute constant score for RSR patients was 54% and 57% for HA patients. RSR had an infection rate of 3%, a dislocation rate of 4% and an overall re-operation rate of 5.6%. Conclusion Functional outcomes and range of movements achieved by RSR seem to be similar to those achieved by HA and may eventually be proven to have better outcomes in a certain sub-group of patients. However, there is currently less than 200 patients reported in the literature with a very short term follow-up. RSR is more expensive than HA, and there is a definite learning curve associated with this prosthesis. Although RSR may be valuable in patients where a traditional HA is deemed not suitable, caution must be used until better quality research is available. Level of evidence: Level III systematic review of Level III studies

Outcomes, and factors affecting outcomes, following shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture repair

BackgroundHemiarthroplasty has been applied to treat proximal humeral fracture with variable outcomes. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess factors affecting outcome in patients following hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture (PHF) repair. MethodsPatients with proximal humeral fractures treated over a 6-year period were included. Indications for hemiarthroplasty were severe three-part fractures associated with osteoporosis; four-part fractures with or without dislocation; splitting of the humeral head, or >45% collapse of the humeral head. Surgery outcome and postoperative complications were main outcome measures in this study. ResultsThirty-three of 47 patients were included in the final analysis (mean age 64.3 years, range 43–82). Mean postoperative follow-up was 44.4 (range 36–57) months. Postoperative complications (shoulder dislocation, mild shoulder subluxation, heterotopic ossification) occurred in seven patients. Healing of the greater and lesser tubercles was abnormal or poor in 18 patients. These patients had significantly higher pain scores (4.0 ± 1.1 vs. 2.2 ± 1.1) and significantly lower capacities for active lifting (79.3 ± 9.6 vs. 121.7 ± 24.3), external rotation (20.7 ± 3.7 vs. 39.2 ± 10.3), and Neer scores (79.2 ± 5.7 vs. 90.6 ± 3.6) versus patients who exhibited complete healing (all P < 0.001). Patient age, type of surgical approach, and fracture type were not major influencers of outcome. ConclusionIn conclusion, the healing of the greater and lesser tubercles is the major determinant of outcome following hemiarthroplasty for PHF repair.

Shoulder Arthroplasty for Fracture: Does a Fracture-specific Stem Make a Difference?

Arthroplasty for shoulder fractures is a technically challenging and unpredictable procedure and its use is controversial. We therefore asked (1) to what degree function would be restored, (2) whether tuberosity healing would reliably occur, and (3) whether stem design would influence function in patients treated with hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fracture. We retrospectively reviewed all patients treated with a hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture between September 2001 and May 2006. The first 58 patients (September 2001 to March 2004) were treated with a conventional humeral prosthesis. The next 112 patients (April 2004 to May 2006) were treated with a fracture-specific humeral prosthesis. Clinical measures (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, visual analog pain scores, and goniometric measurements of glenohumeral motion) and radiographic evaluation of tuberosity healing were performed at minimum 24-month followup (mean, 32months; range, 24-96months). Mean active anterior elevation was 118°, mean active external rotation 37.6°, and mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score 66. Overall, 127 of 170 (75%) greater tuberosities healed. With respect to stem design, active anterior elevation, active external rotation, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score were better with fracture-specific stems (129.8°, 39°, and 72, respectively) than with conventional stems (95.4°, 33.0°, and 55, respectively). Fewer tuberosities healed with conventional stems (38 of 58, 66%) than with fracture-specific stems (89 of 112, 79%). The use of fracture-specific stems during proximal humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture appears to improve functional use of the injured shoulder and tuberosity healing compared to conventional stems. Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Review of fixation techniques for the four-part fractured proximal humerus in hemiarthroplasty

IntroductionThe clinical outcome of hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures is not satisfactory. Secondary fragment dislocation may prevent bone integration; the primary stability by a fixation technique is therefore needed to accomplish tuberosity healing. Present technical comparison of surgical fixation techniques reveals the state-of-the-art approach and highlights promising techniques for enhanced stability.MethodA classification of available fixation techniques for three- and four part fractures was done. The placement of sutures and cables was described on the basis of anatomical landmarks such as the rotator cuff tendon insertions, the bicipital groove and the surgical neck. Groups with similar properties were categorized.ResultsMaterials used for fragment fixation include heavy braided sutures and/or metallic cables, which are passed through drilling holes in the bone fragments. The classification resulted in four distinct groups: A: both tuberosities and shaft are fixed together by one suture, B: single tuberosities are independently connected to the shaft and among each other, C: metallic cables are used in addition to the sutures and D: the fragments are connected by short stitches, close to the fragment borderlines.ConclusionsA plurality of techniques for the reconstruction of a fractured proximal humerus is found. The categorisation into similar strategies provides a broad overview of present techniques and supports a further development of optimized techniques. Prospective studies are necessary to correlate the technique with the clinical outcome.

Functional and radiographic long-term outcomes of hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

Hemiarthroplasty is the preferred surgical procedure for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. Our retrospective study examined functional and radiographic outcomes at 2- and 5-year follow-up in patients who received a hemiarthroplasty for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. Forty-seven consecutive patients of a single surgeon treated with a cemented shoulder hemiarthroplasty between 2000 and 2006 were followed up. Standard surgical technique was used in all cases. Postoperative radiographs were compared with radiographs at 2 and 5 years along with active range of motion and functional outcomes scores. Twenty-five patients were examined at 2 years and twenty-two at 2 and 5 years. The mean age was 61 years. The mean acromiohumeral distance decreased from 10.3 mm postoperatively to 8.5 mm at 2 years and 6.7 mm at 5 years (P ≤ .001). More patients had stem osteolysis and tuberosity reabsorption at 2 and 5 years compared with postoperatively (P = .016 and P ≤ .001, respectively). The University of California, Los Angeles score decreased from 26.0 to 22.3 (P = .045); the Constant score decreased from 61.1 to 50.1 (P = .01); the Simple Shoulder Test 12 score decreased from 7.7 to 6.2 (P = .018); and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score decreased from 70.4 to 58.8 (P = .015). Pain scores increased from 2- to 5-year follow-up (P = .018). The range-of-motion measures changed little from the 2-to 5-year follow-up. Hemiarthroplasty has a high rate of long-term complications. Increases in acromiohumeral distance, stem osteolysis, and tuberosity reabsorption were observed between 2- and 5-year follow-up. Pain scores and functional outcomes worsened. No improvement in range of motion was observed.

Reverse shoulder replacement compared with hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

Reverse shoulder replacement compared with hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

Determination of the proper implant height in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

Objective To discuss how to determine the proper implant height in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures. Methods We dissected 22 shoulders of 11 adult cadavers, 7 males and 4females. The distance between the upper border of the pectoralis major tendon insertion on the humerus and the top of the humeral head (PMT), tuberostiy height (HT) and humeral length (HL) were measured. The PMT/HL value was calculated. Results The average PMT, HT and HL was (5. 10 ± 0. 54) cm,(0. 78 ±0. 19) cm and (28.9 ± 1.9) cm respectively, while the PMT/HL averaged 17.6%. The deviation between HL × 17. 6% and PMT for each shoulder was less than 0. 5 cm. No significant difference was found between the bilateral sides of PMT, HT and HL ( P ＞ 0. 05). Correlation was demonstrated between PMT and HL. There was no correlation between HT and HL. Conclusions The upper edge of the pectoralis major insertion constitutes a reliable reference point for restoring proper humeral height. In clinical practice, the humeral length can be restored by placing the prosthesis 5. 10 cm or the value of contralateral humeral length multiplying 17. 6% above the upper insertion of the pectoralis major. Key words: Shouler fracutres; Arthroplasty, replacement; Prostheses and implants; Anatomy

Alternative humeral tubercle fixation in shoulder hemiarthroplasty for fractures of the proximal humerus

We hypothesize that the sling technique provides better long term tuberosity fixation in hemiarthroplasty for severe fractures of the proximal humerus. After hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures, problems exist with deterioration of shoulder function by secondary displacement of the initially fixated humeral tuberosities. This study evaluated a new technique for fixation of the greater and lesser tuberosities in uncemented hemiarthroplasties in severely displaced 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures. A consecutive series of 31 uncemented hemiarthroplasties using the new sling technique to repair the tuberosities was evaluated clinically and radiographically with special emphasis on the head-to-tuberosity distance (HTD). A historical cohort of 10 similar uncemented hemiarthroplasties was the control group in which the drill-hole technique was used for fixation of the humeral tuberosities. The sling technique had an overall better tuberosity positioning in terms of HTD compared with the drill-hole technique (8 vs 1 mm; P = .025, U test). There were significantly more normal HTD values in the sling-technique group (81% vs 44%; P = .032, chi(2) test). In the anatomic HTD group, the Constant score (70 vs 52; P = .009), patient satisfaction (7.1 vs 5.7; P = .038), and visual analog scale score (3.2 vs 5.2; P = .025) were statistically significantly superior compared with the nonanatomic HTD group. The sling technique for tuberosity fixation seems to provide solid fixation. In this study, anatomic HTD fixation was associated with significantly better functional outcome, patient satisfaction, and pain scores.

Tuberosity position correlates with fatty infiltration of the rotator cuff after hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

This study investigates the correlation between tuberosity positioning, fatty infiltration of the rotator cuff, and clinical outcome after hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture. Twenty patients with a mean age of 70.8 +/- 9.9 years were evaluated at a mean of 19.8 +/- 9.4 months. Evaluation included assessment of the Constant score (CS); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score; radiographic evaluation; and computed tomography to classify healing of the tuberosities and changes in the rotator cuff. Fatty degeneration of the cuff was classified according to the Goutallier classification as stage 0 to 4. Tuberosity positioning was classified as mal-positioning of less than 0.5 cm., 0.5 to 1 cm., >1.0 cm., or not healed. The mean Constant Score (CS) of patients with greater tuberosity displacement of <0.5 cm was significantly higher than the CS of patients with > or =0.5 cm displacement and non-united greater tuberosities. The CS of patients with greater tuberosity displacement of 0.5 to 1 cm was significantly higher than that in patients with non-united greater tuberosities. For the lesser tuberosity, patients with displacement of <0.5 cm showed significantly higher outcome scores than patients with displacement of >1 cm and non-united lesser tuberosities. There was a significant correlation between fatty infiltration of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles and greater tuberosity malposition and between fatty infiltration of the subscapularis and lesser tuberosity malposition. Fatty infiltration of the cuff was significantly associated with lower clinical scores. Tuberosity positioning and healing are critical for improved clinical outcomes after hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures.

The pectoralis major tendon as a reference for restoring humeral length and retroversion with hemiarthroplasty for fracture

The success of anatomic reattachment of the tuberosities in proximal humeral fractures, treated with hemiarthroplasty, correlates with functional results. The purpose of this study was to determine the value of the upper edge of the pectoralis major insertion (PMI) as a landmark to establish the proper height and version of hemiarthroplasty implanted for proximal humeral fractures. Twenty cadaveric humeri were studied by CT scan to analyze the relationship between the PMI and humeral height and retroversion. The mean distance from the PMI to the tangent to the humeral head was 5.64 cm. The mean distance of the PMI to the posterior fin of the prosthesis was 1.06 cm. The mean angle between the PMI and the posterior fin of the prosthesis was 24.65 degrees. The upper edge of the pectoralis major insertion constitutes a reproducible reference point to restore proper humeral height and retroversion in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture.

Reconstruction of humeral length and centering of the prosthetic head in hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures

Anatomic reconstruction of humeral length in hemiarthroplasty for complex proximal humeral fractures is difficult because reliable surgical landmarks are missing or are destroyed by the fracture. The pectoralis major tendon is a reliable landmark to determine prosthetic height intraoperatively. This study analyzed the clinical outcome, reconstruction of humeral length, centering of the prosthetic head in the glenoid, and tuberosity positioning and healing, using the pectoralis major tendon as a reference intraoperatively. The study included 30 patients. In 21 patients (group 1), humeral length reconstruction was performed using the pectoralis major tendon as a reference; in 9 (group 2), this reference was not used. Patients underwent a clinical and radiologic evaluation at a mean of 22.7 months. Group 1 showed significantly better results in clinical and radiologic values, especially in anatomic reconstruction of humeral length, than group 2. Clinical outcome depended significantly on greater tuberosity healing and centering of the prosthetic head in the glenoid.

Primary Hemiarthroplasty for Proximal Humeral Fractures in the Elderly: Long-Term Functional Outcome and Social Implications.

Primary shoulder hemiarthroplasty is an established treatment modality for complex fractures of the proximal humerus. Long-term functional outcome is often disappointing. However, little is known about social implications particularly in the elderly. A single-institution case series of consecutive geriatric patients (age > 70 years) treated with shoulder hemiarthroplasty for complex fractures of the proximal humerus between 1994 and 1997 was analysed. Postoperative morbidity, long-term function, radiological outcome and social implications were evaluated. Seventy-seven patients fulfilled the study criteria. Median age at the time of operation was 80 years (range 70-93 years). Systemic and local postoperative complications were observed in 8% including 2 patients (3%) with revision surgery. Postoperative mortality was 1%. Forty-eight patients (62%) were available for follow-up (median 49 months, range 25-80 months), 22 (29%) died from causes unrelated to hemiarthroplasty before follow-up and 7 patients (9%) did not attend follow-up examination. Median Constant-Murley score was 41 points (range 17-77 points). Long-term results concerning pain were satisfying. The Oxford shoulder score ranged from 14 to 40 (median 30). Forty-one patients (85%) still lived in their original environment and managed their daily life independently despite poor shoulder function. Four patients (8%) lived in a retirement home and 3 (6%) in a nursery home. Eighty percent of our patients were still able to use public transportation, do the daily shopping and wash their whole body by themselves. Most patients managed their daily life independently despite poor shoulder function.

The Use of the Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis for the Treatment of Failed Hemiarthroplasty for Proximal Humeral Fracture

Humeral hemiarthroplasty is an established treatment for patients with selected fractures of the proximal part of the humerus. However, a subset of patients have development of glenoid arthritis and rotator cuff deficiency due to tuberosity failure. To date, there has been no reliable salvage procedure for this problem. Over a period of five years, twenty-nine patients (twenty-five women and four men) with a mean age of sixty-nine years (range, forty-two to eighty years) were managed with removal of a hemiarthroplasty prosthesis and revision with a Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis alone or in combination with a proximal humeral allograft. Patients were followed clinically and radiographically for an average of thirty-five months. All patients were evaluated with use of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score; the Simple Shoulder Test; range-of-motion measurements, including abduction, forward flexion, and external rotation; and a rating scale for overall satisfaction with the outcome of the surgery. Patients were assessed preoperatively and at all follow-up points beginning at three months postoperatively. The average total American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 22.3 preoperatively to 52.1 at the time of the last follow-up (p < 0.001). The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons pain score improved from 12.2 to 34.4 (p < 0.001), and the average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons function score improved from 10.1 to 17.7 (p = 0.058). The average Simple Shoulder Test score improved from 0.9 to 2.6 (p = 0.004). Forward flexion improved from 38.1 degrees to 72.7 degrees (p < 0.001), and abduction improved from 34.1 degrees to 70.4 degrees (p < 0.001). The overall complication rate was 28% (eight of twenty-nine). At the time of the latest follow-up, sixteen patients rated the outcome as good or excellent, seven rated it as satisfactory, and six were dissatisfied. Four of the six patients who were dissatisfied had been managed with a Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis alone. The Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis offers a salvage-type solution to the problem of failed hemiarthroplasty due to glenoid arthritis and rotator cuff deficiency following tuberosity failure. The early results reported here are promising. In cases of severe proximal humeral bone deficiency, augmentation of the Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis with a proximal humeral allograft may improve patient satisfaction.