Treatment Of Humeral Head Fractures Research Articles

Dynamic locking screws in proximal humeral plate osteosynthesis demonstrate superior fixation properties: a biomechanical study

PurposeAngular stable implants reduced the complication rate in the treatment of humeral head fractures. But the failure rate is still high. To further reduce the risk of cut-out, cement augmentation of screws was introduced. A reason for failure of plate osteosynthesis might be the extremely high stiffness of the screw-plate interface leading to a loss of reduction and cut-out of screws. A more homogeneous distribution of the forces on all screws may avoid secondary dislocation. We hypothesize that dynamic osteosynthesis minimizes screw loosening and results in a higher load to failure than standard locking screws.MethodsTwelve paired human humerus specimens were analysed. A standardized three-part fracture model with a metaphyseal defect was simulated. Within each pair of humeri, one was fixed with a Philos plate and standard locking screws (LS), whereas the other humerus was fixed with a Philos plate and dynamic locking screws (DLS). A cyclic varus-bending test or a rotation test with increasing loading force was performed until failure of the screw-bone-fixation.ResultsIn the varus bending test, pairs failed by screw loosening in the humeral head. The LS-group reached 2901 (601–5201) load cycles until failure, while the DLS-group failed after 3731 (2001–5601) cycles. This corresponds to a median loading of 195 N for the LS-group and 235 N for the DLS-group (p = 0.028). In the rotation test the LS-group reached a median of 1101 (501–1501) load cycles until failure of fixation occurred, while the DLS-group failed after 1401 (401–2201) cycles (p = 0.225).ConclusionsPlate fixation using dynamic locking screws for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures demonstrated more load cycles until failure compared to standard locking plate osteosynthesis.

Clinical and structural outcomes after locking intramedullary nails versus locking plates in the treatment of humeral head fractures: A meta-analysis

Clinical and structural outcomes after locking intramedullary nails versus locking plates in the treatment of humeral head fractures: A meta-analysis

Vergleich der offenen vs. perkutanen Versorgung der Oberarmkopffraktur

The hypothesis of this study was that percutaneous techniques lower the risk of post-traumatic avascular necrosis. In this retrospective study 83 patients were followed up clinically and radiologically for signs of avascular necrosis and nonunion after open or percutaneous treatment of proximal humerus fractures. Mean age was 50 years. Fractures were classified in 22 patients (26.5%) as two part, in 21 patients (25.3%) as three part, in 39 patients (47%) as four part, and in 1 patient (1.2%) as fracture dislocation (Neer classification). Fractures were treated in 12 patients (14.5%) by ORIF (open reduction and internal fixation) and in 71 patients (85.5%) by CRPF (closed reduction and percutaneous fixation). Both groups were statistically equally distributed according to fracture type (Mann-Whitney U, p=0.267) and age (One-way-Annova, p=0.740). The postoperative regime did not differ between the two groups. Patients suffered significantly more avascular necrosis after open treatment [five patients (50%) versus eight patients (12.7%) in the percutaneous group, Mann-Whitney, p=0.004]. The risk for avascular necrosis and nonunion increased with age. Mean age of patients with avascular necrosis was 57 years, and the age of patients with nonunion was 67 years. Percutaneous treatment of humeral head fractures seems to be a reliable method for lowering the risk of avascular necrosis in young patients.

Conservative or operative treatment of humeral head fractures in the elderly?

The humeral head fracture in the elderly represents an unresolved problem, which is reflected by the variety of existing therapeutic strategies ranging from conservative treatment to humeral head replacement. The main factors influencing the prognostic outcome are the fracture type, age of the patient and biologic criteria such as osteoporosis, blood supply at the fragments, and the degree of soft tissue trauma. For selection of the optimal treatment, the general condition of the patient, additional injuries and chronic diseases have to be respected as much as the patient's compliance and personal demands. According to experimental and clinical findings, for displaced two- and three-part fractures of the elderly patient minimal osteosynthesis and in the future plate osteosynthesis with angular stability should be preferred. For these fracture types, conservative treatment must be included in the therapeutic spectrum. In contrast, displaced four-part fractures and fracture dislocations are indications for primary humeral head replacement. This is explained by the fact that neither conservative treatment nor surgical reconstruction procedures meet the main goal of primary therapy, aiming for early painless mobilization and for timely discharging the elderly patients in their social environment.