38. FACTORS AFFECTING THE OUTCOMES OF SURGICAL TREATMENT WITH INTERNAL FIXATION USING LOCKING PLATE FOR THREE- TO FOUR-PART PROXIMAL HUMERUS FRACTURES IN OLDER ADULTS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Surgery for internal fixation using locking plate or shoulder arthroplasty remains a controversial issue in the treatment of complex 3-4 fragment fractures of the proximal humerus, especially in elderly patients. Despite the wider use of locking plate systems for the proximal humerus compared to head replacement, the complication rate after internal fixation with locking plates remains high. Risk factors such as low bone density, advanced age, loss of medial cortical support, and comminuted fractures can negatively impact treatment outcomes. The objective of this study is to evaluate the functional outcomes and imaging of the shoulder joint when using locking plates for the treatment of complex 3-4 fragment fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients, as well as the factors that may affect outcomes and complication rates at the Ho Chi Minh Hospital for Traumalogy and Orthopeadics.
Method: A descriptive study was conducted on a series of cases involving 58 patients over 50 years old with 3-4 fragment proximal humerus fractures who underwent surgical correction combined with internal fixation using locking plate and screw at the Ho Chi Minh City Orthopedic Hospital.
Result: 58 patients with a mean age of 62,78 ± 7,73 were followed up for an average of 26,24 ± 5,93 months after surgery. Among them, 41 cases had 3 fragment fractures, accounting for 70,68%, and 17 cases had 4 fragment fractures, accounting for 29,32%. At the final follow-up, the average Constant score for the patients was 70,81 ± 9,15, and the average DASH score was 8,33 ± 2,77. There were 6 cases of complications (10,34%). Among them, there was 1 case of avascular necrosis of the humeral head leading to screw penetration complication. The remaining cases included 1 cases of screw penetration, 3 cases of subacromial impingement, 1 case of avascular necrosis and 1 case of loss of reduction of greater tuberosity. The complexity of fractures, such as 4-fragment fractures, displacement greater than 2mm, and larger calcar fragment size resulted in lower Constant scores and higher DASH scores (p<0,05). Age, gender, bone density as measured by deltoid tuberosity index (DTI), bone grafting, and the use of rotator cuff suture also showed similar results, but the differences were not statistically significant.
Conclusion: Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) provide good bone healing and functional outcomes in cases of 3-4 fragment proximal humerus fractures. Age, gender, bone density, bone grafting and rotator cuff suture do not significantly affect the functional results after surgery. Therefore, osteoporosis should not be considered a contraindication for ORIF with locking plate in treating 3-4 fragment proximal humerus fractures in elderly patients. More complex fractures, with multiple fragments, displacement, complete dislocation, calcar hinge less than 2mm, and dislocation with detached fragment often result in poor functional outcomes and a higher rate of complications after surgery.
Article Details
Keywords
Proximal humerus fracture, open reduction internal fixation, osteoporosis, calcar margin.
References
systematic review of locking plate fixation
of proximal humerus fractures. Injury.
2011;42(4):408-13.
[2] Brunner F, Sommer C, Bahrs C et al., Open
reduction and internal fixation of proximal
humerus fractures using a proximal humeral
locked plate: a prospective multicenter analysis.
J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(3):163-72.
[3] Dietrich M, Meier C, Lattmann T et al.,
[Complex fracture of the proximal humerus
in the elderly. Locking plate osteosynthesis vs
hemiarthroplasty]. Chirurg. 2008;79(3):231-40.
[4] Krappinger D, Bizzotto N, Riedmann S et
al., Predicting failure after surgical fixation
of proximal humerus fractures. Injury.
2011;42(11):1283-8.
[5] Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M et al.,
Predictors of humeral head ischemia after
intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004;13(4):427-33.
[6] Moonot P, Ashwood N, Hamlet M, Early
results for treatment of three- and four-part
fractures of the proximal humerus using the
PHILOS plate system. J Bone Joint Surg Br.
2007;89(9):1206-9.
[7] Geiger EV, Maier M, Kelm A et al., Functional
outcome and complications following PHILOS
plate fixation in proximal humeral fractures.
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2010;44(1):1-6.
[8] Grawe B, Le T, Lee T et al., Open Reduction
and Internal Fixation (ORIF) of Complex 3- and
4-Part Fractures of the Proximal Humerus: Does
Age Really Matter? Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil.
2012;3(1):27-32.
[9] Rodia F, Theodorakis E, Touloupakis G et
al., Fixation of complex proximal humeral
fractures in elderly patients with a locking
plate: A retrospective analysis of radiographic
and clinical outcome and complications. Chin J
Traumatol. 2016;19(3):156-9.
[10] Belayneh R, Lott A, Haglin J et al., The role
of patients’ overall expectations of health
on outcomes following proximal humerus
fracture repair. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res.
2021;107(8):103043.
[11] Luciani P, Procaccini R, Rotini M et al., Angular
stable plate versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty
for proximal humeral fractures in elderly patient.
Musculoskelet Surg. 2022;106(1):43-8.
[12] Klug A, Harth J, Hoffmann R et al., Surgical
treatment of complex proximal humeral
fractures in elderly patients: a matched-pair
analysis of angular-stable plating vs. reverse
shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.
2020;29(9):1796-803.
[13] Ott N, Muller C, Jacobs A et al., Outcome
of geriatric proximal humeral fractures:
a comparison between reverse shoulder
arthroplasty versus open reduction and internal
fixation. OTA Int. 2022;5(2 Suppl):e188.
[14] Bue M, Bright E, Thillemann TM et al.,
Osteoporosis does not affect bone mineral
density change in the proximal humerus or
the functional outcome after open reduction
and internal fixation of unilateral displaced
3- or 4-part fractures at 12-month follow-up. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2023;32(2):292-301.
[15] Neer CS, 2nd. Displaced proximal humeral
fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone
Joint Surg Am. 1970;52(6):1077-89.
[16] Osterhoff G, Hoch A, Wanner GA et al., Calcar
comminution as prognostic factor of clinical
outcome after locking plate fixation of proximal
humeral fractures. Injury. 2012;43(10):1651-6.
[17] Solberg BD, Moon CN, Franco DP et al., Locked
plating of 3- and 4-part proximal humerus
fractures in older patients: the effect of initial
fracture pattern on outcome. J Orthop Trauma.
2009;23(2):113-9.
[18] Barlow JD, Logli AL, Steinmann SP et al.,
Locking plate fixation of proximal humerus
fractures in patients older than 60 years continues
to be associated with a high complication rate. J
Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020;29(8):1689-94.
[19] Foruria AM, Martinez-Catalan N, Valencia M
et al., Proximal humeral fracture locking plate
fixation with anatomic reduction, and a short-and
cemented-screws configuration, dramatically
reduces the implant related failure rate in elderly
patients. JSES Int. 2021;5(6):992-1000.
[20] Boesmueller S, Wech M, Gregori M et al., Risk
factors for humeral head necrosis and non-union
after plating in proximal humeral fractures.
Injury. 2016;47(2):350-5.
[21] Schliemann B, Siemoneit J, Theisen C et al.,
Complex fractures of the proximal humerus in
the elderly--outcome and complications after
locking plate fixation. Musculoskelet Surg.
2012;96 Suppl 1:S3-11.