Fracture vs. standard stem for proximal humerus fractures using reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Q4 Medicine
Ronit Kulkarni BS, Josie Elwell PhD, Chris P. Roche MSE, Josef K. Eichinger MD, Richard J. Friedman MD, FRCSC
{"title":"Fracture vs. standard stem for proximal humerus fractures using reverse total shoulder arthroplasty","authors":"Ronit Kulkarni BS,&nbsp;Josie Elwell PhD,&nbsp;Chris P. Roche MSE,&nbsp;Josef K. Eichinger MD,&nbsp;Richard J. Friedman MD, FRCSC","doi":"10.1053/j.sart.2023.12.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) and hemiarthroplasty are recognized treatment options for significantly displaced proximal humerus fractures. Repair of the tuberosities and preservation of rotator cuff function is a principle of treatment to enhance function and prevent instability. Humeral fracture stems were developed to improve tuberosity union with hemiarthroplasty, and similarly fracture stems are used with rTSA with promising results. However, there are conflicting studies on the use of fracture stems in improving outcomes in rTSA for proximal humerus fracture. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical and radiographic outcomes, complication and revision rates, and patient satisfaction for fracture vs. standard stems for acute proximal humerus fracture treated with rTSA.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A prospective multi-institutional institutional review board approved registry with a minimum two-year follow-up was queried and identified 231 patients that underwent rTSA for acute proximal humerus fracture, 187 of which received a fracture stem and 44 that received a standard stem. Patients were excluded if there was a previous fracture repair, malunion, or nonunion. Patient demographics, clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications, revision surgery, and patient reported outcome measures were collected preoperatively and at latest follow-up postoperatively.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The mean follow-up was 48 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 24 and 54 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 34 months, mean age was 74 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 7.9 and 72 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 8.6 years, and mean body mass index was 28 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 6.1 and 30 <span><math><mrow><mo>±</mo></mrow></math></span> 5.3 kg/m<sup>2</sup> for fracture and standard stems, respectively. Both fracture and standard stem groups showed significant improvements in patient reported clinical outcomes preoperative to postoperatively. Postoperatively, patients with fracture and standard stems had comparable abduction, forward elevation, internal rotation, external rotation, Visual Analog Scale pain, Global Shoulder Function scale, Simple Shoulder Test scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scale, University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score, and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score. Patient satisfaction was high and did not differ between the two groups. Similar rates of humeral radiolucent lines, scapular notching, complications, and revision rates occurred between the fracture vs. standard stem groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>There were no significant differences in postoperative clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, complication rate, revision rate, and patient satisfaction between the fracture and standard stem groups for the treatment of acute proximal humerus fracture using rTSA. Both stems significantly improved clinical outcomes postoperatively. Either a fracture or standard stem may be used to achieve improved clinical outcomes for acute proximal humerus fracture using rTSA.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39885,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","volume":"34 2","pages":"Pages 371-376"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045452724000063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) and hemiarthroplasty are recognized treatment options for significantly displaced proximal humerus fractures. Repair of the tuberosities and preservation of rotator cuff function is a principle of treatment to enhance function and prevent instability. Humeral fracture stems were developed to improve tuberosity union with hemiarthroplasty, and similarly fracture stems are used with rTSA with promising results. However, there are conflicting studies on the use of fracture stems in improving outcomes in rTSA for proximal humerus fracture. The purpose of this study is to determine the clinical and radiographic outcomes, complication and revision rates, and patient satisfaction for fracture vs. standard stems for acute proximal humerus fracture treated with rTSA.

Methods

A prospective multi-institutional institutional review board approved registry with a minimum two-year follow-up was queried and identified 231 patients that underwent rTSA for acute proximal humerus fracture, 187 of which received a fracture stem and 44 that received a standard stem. Patients were excluded if there was a previous fracture repair, malunion, or nonunion. Patient demographics, clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications, revision surgery, and patient reported outcome measures were collected preoperatively and at latest follow-up postoperatively.

Results

The mean follow-up was 48 ± 24 and 54 ± 34 months, mean age was 74 ± 7.9 and 72 ± 8.6 years, and mean body mass index was 28 ± 6.1 and 30 ± 5.3 kg/m2 for fracture and standard stems, respectively. Both fracture and standard stem groups showed significant improvements in patient reported clinical outcomes preoperative to postoperatively. Postoperatively, patients with fracture and standard stems had comparable abduction, forward elevation, internal rotation, external rotation, Visual Analog Scale pain, Global Shoulder Function scale, Simple Shoulder Test scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scale, University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score, and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score. Patient satisfaction was high and did not differ between the two groups. Similar rates of humeral radiolucent lines, scapular notching, complications, and revision rates occurred between the fracture vs. standard stem groups.

Conclusion

There were no significant differences in postoperative clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, complication rate, revision rate, and patient satisfaction between the fracture and standard stem groups for the treatment of acute proximal humerus fracture using rTSA. Both stems significantly improved clinical outcomes postoperatively. Either a fracture or standard stem may be used to achieve improved clinical outcomes for acute proximal humerus fracture using rTSA.

使用反向全肩关节置换术治疗肱骨近端骨折的骨折茎突与标准茎突的对比
背景反向全肩关节置换术(rTSA)和半关节置换术是公认的治疗肱骨近端明显移位骨折的方法。修复结节和保留肩袖功能是增强功能和预防不稳定的治疗原则。肱骨骨折茎突的开发是为了改善半关节成形术的结节结合,类似的骨折茎突也被用于rTSA,并取得了良好的效果。然而,在使用骨折柄改善肱骨近端骨折 rTSA 的疗效方面,研究结果并不一致。本研究的目的是确定使用rTSA治疗急性肱骨近端骨折时,骨折柄与标准柄的临床和放射影像学结果、并发症和翻修率以及患者满意度。方法通过查询经审查委员会批准的至少随访两年的前瞻性多机构登记处,确定了231名因急性肱骨近端骨折而接受rTSA的患者,其中187名接受了骨折柄,44名接受了标准柄。如果患者之前进行过骨折修复、愈合不良或未愈合,则排除在外。结果平均随访时间分别为48±24个月和54±34个月,平均年龄分别为74±7.9岁和72±8.6岁,骨折干组和标准干组的平均体重指数分别为28±6.1千克/平方米和30±5.3千克/平方米。从术前到术后,骨折组和标准柄组患者报告的临床结果均有显著改善。术后,骨折组和标准柄组患者的外展、前抬、内旋、外旋、视觉模拟量表疼痛、全球肩关节功能量表、简单肩关节测试量表、美国肩肘外科医生量表、加州大学洛杉矶分校肩关节评分和肩关节成形术智能评分均相当。患者的满意度很高,两组之间没有差异。结论使用rTSA治疗急性肱骨近端骨折时,骨折组和标准柄组在术后临床疗效、影像学疗效、并发症发生率、翻修率和患者满意度方面均无显著差异。两种骨干都能明显改善术后临床疗效。使用rTSA治疗急性肱骨近端骨折时,骨折干或标准干均可改善临床疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Seminars in Arthroplasty
Seminars in Arthroplasty Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
期刊介绍: Each issue of Seminars in Arthroplasty provides a comprehensive, current overview of a single topic in arthroplasty. The journal addresses orthopedic surgeons, providing authoritative reviews with emphasis on new developments relevant to their practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信