Hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures with conservation of the whole humeral head as autograft: does it improve greater tuberosity healing?
- 115 Downloads
Hemiarthroplasty (HA) for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) is associated with tuberosity complications like migration, non-union, and resorption. In order to improve the rate of consolidation of the greater tuberosity (GT), we have developed a hollow humeral head prosthesis in which the whole humeral head is inserted and used as autograft. This study is designed to evaluate the consolidation rate of the GT with this device.
Twenty-two patients at mean age of 68 were treated between 2015 and 2017 for four-part fractures, fracture-dislocations, and head-split fractures with HA including the bony humeral head. The humeral prosthesis device comprises a prosthetic cephalic cup in which the detached humeral head is inserted and a cementless adjustable humeral stem which works like a jack. Mean follow-up was 14 months. The consolidation of GT was followed on X-rays. As comparison, 15 published series were selected and analyzed.
There were two mechanical complications related to GT consolidation (9.1%). In the 20 other cases, the GT was radiologically consolidated without displacement. While the raw proportion of complications observed in the present series was lower than that reported in each of the 15 comparative series, the proportion of complications observed in the present series was significantly different from that observed only in seven out of the 15 previous series.
Whole conservation of the humeral head as an autograft along with proper surgical technique yielded in 20 consolidations of GT without displacement in 22 cases of PHF treated with hemiarthroplasty.
KeywordsHumeral autograft Proximal humerus fracture Shoulder hemiarthroplasty Tuberosity
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
- 1.Voos JE, Dines JS, Dines DM (2010) Arthroplasty for fractures of the proximal part of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(6):1560–1567Google Scholar
- 2.Antuna SA, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. (2008) Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for acute fractures of the proximal humerus: a minimum five-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17:202–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.025
- 3.Robinson CM, Page RS, Hill RM, Sanders DL, Court-Brown CM, Wakefield AE (2003) Primary hemiarthroplasty for treatment of proximal humeral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(7):1215–1223Google Scholar
- 4.Boss AP, Hintermann B (1999) Primary endoprosthesis in comminuted humeral head fractures in patients over 60 years of age. Int Orthop 23(3):172–174Google Scholar
- 5.Tanner MW, Cofield RH (1983) Prosthetic arthroplasty for fractures and fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 179:116–128Google Scholar
- 6.Neer CS 2nd (2002) Four-segment classification of proximal humeral fractures: purpose and reliable use. J Shoulder Elb Surg 11:389–400Google Scholar
- 8.Gronhagen CM, Abbaszadegan H, Revay SA, Adolphson PY (2007) Medium-term results after primary hemiarthroplasty for comminute proximal humerus fractures: a study of 46 patients followed up for an average of 4.4 years. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:766–773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.03.017 Google Scholar
- 9.Loew M, Heitkemper S, Parsch D, Schneider S, Rickert M (2006) Influence of the design of the prosthesis on the outcome after hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder in displaced fractures of the head of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:345–350. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.88B3.16909 Google Scholar
- 10.Kralinger F, Schwaiger R, Wambacher M, Farrell E, Menth-Chiari W, Lajtai G et al (2004) Outcome after primary hemiarthroplasty for fracture of the head of the humerus. A retrospective multicentre study of 167 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:217–219. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86B2.14553 Google Scholar
- 11.Mighell MA, Kolm GP, Collinge CA, Frankle MA. (2003) Outcomes of hemiarthroplasty for fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elb Surg 12:569–577. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(03) 00213-1
- 15.White JJ, Soothill JR, Morgan M, DI2 C, Espag MP, Tambe AA (2017) Outcomes for a large metaphyseal volume hemiarthroplasty in complex fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elb Surg 26(3):478–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.08.004
- 16.Lopiz Y, García-Coiradas J, Serrano-Mateo L, García-Fernández C, Marco F (2016) Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures in the geriatric patient: results, health-related quality of life and complication rates. Int Orthop 40(4):771–781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3085-z Google Scholar
- 19.Doursounian L, Le Sant A, Mauprivez R, Miquel A, Beauthier-Landauer V (2016) Open reduction and internal fixation of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures by intra-focal distraction: observational study of twenty five cases. Int Orthop 40(11):2373–2382Google Scholar
- 22.Constant CR (1997) An evaluation of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:695–696Google Scholar
- 27.F1 R, Mühlhäusler B, Wahl D, Nijs S (2010) Functional outcome of shoulder hemiarthroplasty for fractures: a multicentre analysis. Injury 41(6):606–612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2009.11.019
- 28.Amirfeyz R, Sarangi P (2008) Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for fracture with a conservative rehabilitation regime. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128:985–988Google Scholar
- 29.Agresti A, Coull BA (1998) Approximate is better than «exact» for interval estimation of binomial proportions. Am Stat 52(2):119–126Google Scholar
- 30.Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG (2008) Identifying and measuring heterogeneity. In Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester UK, pp 277–278Google Scholar
- 31.Schaarschmidt F, Biesheuvel E, Hothorn LA (2009) Asymptotic simultaneous confidence intervals for many-to-one comparisons of binary proportions in randomized clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 19(2):292–310Google Scholar
- 32.Schwarzer G (2007) Meta: an R package for meta-analysis. R News 7(3):40–45Google Scholar
- 34.Murray IR, Amin AK, White TO, Robinson CM (2011) Proximal humeral fractures: current concepts in classification, treatment and outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:1–11Google Scholar
- 37.Farshad M, Gerber C (2010) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty from the most to the least common complication. Int Orthop 34(8):1075–1082Google Scholar
- 38.Van Wunnik BPW, Weijers PHE, Van Helden SH, Brink PRG, Poeze M, M (2011) Osteoporosis is not a risk factor for the development of nonunion: a cohort nested case–control study. Injury 42(12):1491–1494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.08.019
- 39.Jeong J, Bryan J, Iannotti JP (2009) Effect of a variable prosthetic neck-shaft angle and the surgical technique on replication of normal humeral anatomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:1932–1941Google Scholar
- 40.Robertson DD, Yuan J, Bigliani LU (2000) Three-dimensional analysis of the proximal part of the humerus: relevance to arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(11):1594–1602Google Scholar
- 41.Iannotti JP, Gabriel JP, Schneck SL, Evans BG, Misra S (1992) The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74(4):491–500Google Scholar