Osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures: a 1-year analysis of failure in a Belgian level-1 trauma centre

Preventing varus collapse in proximal humerus fracture fixation: 90-90 dual plating versus endosteal fibular allograft strut

INTRODUCTION

Screw cut out and varus collapse are the most common complication of locked plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare dual plating and endosteal fibular allograft struts as augmentation strategies to prevent varus collapse.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A trapezoidal osteotomy was created at the metaphysis to create a 2-part proximal humerus model in 18 paired shoulder specimens. Each specimen was assigned to group A, B, or C and was fixed with either a lateral locking plate, a lateral locking plate and anterior one-third tubular plate in an orthogonal 90/90 configuration, or a lateral locking plate with intramedullary fibular strut, respectively. The specimens were stressed in axial compression to failure. Displacement, elastic limit, ultimate load, and stiffness were recorded and calculated.

RESULTS

There was no difference in mean cyclic displacement between the three groups (0.71 mm vs 0.89 mm vs 0.61 mm for Group A, B, C, respectively). Lateral plating demonstrated the greatest absolute and relative displacement at the elastic limit (5.3 mm ± 1.5 and 4.4 mm ± 1.3) without significance. The elastic limit or yield point was greatest for fibular allograft, Group C (1223 N ± 501 vs 1048 N ± 367 for Group B and 951 N ± 249 for Group A) without significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual plating of proximal humerus fractures in a 90-90 configuration demonstrates similar biomechanical properties as endosteal fibular strut allograft. Both strategies demonstrate superior stiffness to isolated lateral locked plating.

Age-Independent Clinical Outcome in Proximal Humeral Fractures: 2-Year Results Using the Example of a Precontoured Locking Plate

INTRODUCTION

The optimal treatment strategy for the proximal humeral fracture (PHF) remains controversial. The debate is centered around the correct treatment strategy in the elderly patient population. The present study investigated whether age predicts the functional outcome of locking plate osteosynthesis for this fracture entity.

METHODS

A consecutive series of patients with surgically treated displaced PHF between 01/2017 and 01/2018 was retrospectively analyzed. Patients were treated by locking plate osteosynthesis. The cohort was divided into two groups: Group 1 (≥65 years) and Group 2 (<65 years). At the follow-up examination, the SSV, CMS, ASES, and Oxford Shoulder Score (OS), as well as a radiological follow-up, was obtained. The quality of fracture reduction is evaluated according to Schnetzke et al. Results: Of the 95 patients, 79 were followed up (83.1%). Group 1 consists of 42 patients (age range: 65-89 years, FU: 25 months) and Group 2 of 37 patients (28-64 years, FU: 24 months). The clinical results showed no significant differences between both groups: SSV 73.4 ± 23.4% (Group 1) vs. 80.5 ± 189% (Group 2). CMS: 79.4 ± 21 vs. 81.9 ± 16, ASES: 77.2 ± 20.4 vs. 77.5 ± 23.1, OS: 39.5 ± 9.1 vs. 40.8 ± 8.2; OS: 39.5 ± 9.1 vs. 40.8 ± 8.2. In the radiological follow-up, fractures healed in all cases. Furthermore, the quality of fracture reduction in both groups is comparable without significant differences. The revision rate was 9.5% in Group 1 vs. 16.2% in Group 2.

DISCUSSION

Both age groups show comparable functional outcomes and complication rates. Thus, the locking plate osteosynthesis can be used irrespective of patient age; the treatment decision should instead be based on fracture morphology and individual patient factors.