Cemented Versus Uncemented Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures: National Shoulder Arthroplasty Data from Türkiye.

IF 1.9 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-12 DOI:10.4055/cios23397
Özlem Orhan, İbrahim Kaya, İzzet Bingöl, Baran Sarikaya, Mustafa Okan Ayvali, Naim Ata, M Mahir Ülgü, Şuayip Birinci, Fatih Karaaslan, H Çağdaş Basat
{"title":"Cemented Versus Uncemented Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures: National Shoulder Arthroplasty Data from Türkiye.","authors":"Özlem Orhan, İbrahim Kaya, İzzet Bingöl, Baran Sarikaya, Mustafa Okan Ayvali, Naim Ata, M Mahir Ülgü, Şuayip Birinci, Fatih Karaaslan, H Çağdaş Basat","doi":"10.4055/cios23397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study evaluated national trends in cemented and uncemented reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for proximal humerus fractures using a comprehensive national surgical database. This study aimed to compare RSA used in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures with the literature and to determine the country's trend.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted using the health records of individuals aged ≥ 18 years who underwent RSA for proximal humerus fractures between 2016 and 2022. Patients were divided into cemented and uncemented groups, and demographic data (age, sex), duration of hospital stay, transfusions, revisions, mortality, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 618 cemented RSA and 1,364 uncemented RSA procedures were reviewed. Patients who underwent cemented RSA were significantly older than those who had uncemented RSA (<i>p</i> = 0.002). Transfusion rates were higher in the cemented RSA group (<i>p</i> = 0.006). The frequency of revision surgery was 6.1%. Younger age and male sex were associated with revision (<i>p</i> < 0.001). CCI scores were higher among transfused patients than non-transfused patients (<i>p</i> < 0.001). The incidence of cemented RSA was 11.7% and 49% in 2016 and 2022, respectively. Differences were found among hospital types and geographical regions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While cemented RSA has been gaining attention and increased application in recent years for proximal humerus fractures, uncemented RSA still predominates. The choice between these 2 methods is largely influenced by regional and hospital-level factors. The type of RSA and high CCI scores were found to have no significant impact on the risk of surgical revision.</p>","PeriodicalId":47648,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11262942/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4055/cios23397","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study evaluated national trends in cemented and uncemented reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for proximal humerus fractures using a comprehensive national surgical database. This study aimed to compare RSA used in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures with the literature and to determine the country's trend.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using the health records of individuals aged ≥ 18 years who underwent RSA for proximal humerus fractures between 2016 and 2022. Patients were divided into cemented and uncemented groups, and demographic data (age, sex), duration of hospital stay, transfusions, revisions, mortality, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores were analyzed.

Results: A total of 618 cemented RSA and 1,364 uncemented RSA procedures were reviewed. Patients who underwent cemented RSA were significantly older than those who had uncemented RSA (p = 0.002). Transfusion rates were higher in the cemented RSA group (p = 0.006). The frequency of revision surgery was 6.1%. Younger age and male sex were associated with revision (p < 0.001). CCI scores were higher among transfused patients than non-transfused patients (p < 0.001). The incidence of cemented RSA was 11.7% and 49% in 2016 and 2022, respectively. Differences were found among hospital types and geographical regions.

Conclusions: While cemented RSA has been gaining attention and increased application in recent years for proximal humerus fractures, uncemented RSA still predominates. The choice between these 2 methods is largely influenced by regional and hospital-level factors. The type of RSA and high CCI scores were found to have no significant impact on the risk of surgical revision.

骨水泥与非骨水泥反向肩关节置换术治疗肱骨近端骨折:土耳其全国肩关节置换术数据。
背景:本研究利用一个综合性国家外科数据库,评估了肱骨近端骨折的骨水泥和非骨水泥反向肩关节置换术(RSA)的国家趋势。该研究旨在将用于治疗肱骨近端骨折的 RSA 与文献进行比较,并确定全国的趋势:这项横断面研究使用了2016年至2022年期间年龄≥18岁、因肱骨近端骨折接受RSA治疗的个人健康记录。研究人员将患者分为骨水泥组和非骨水泥组,并分析了人口统计学数据(年龄、性别)、住院时间、输血、翻修、死亡率和夏尔森综合征指数(CCI)评分:结果:共回顾了618例骨水泥RSA手术和1,364例非骨水泥RSA手术。接受骨水泥RSA的患者年龄明显大于接受非骨水泥RSA的患者(P = 0.002)。骨水泥RSA组的输血率更高(p = 0.006)。翻修手术的频率为6.1%。年轻和男性与翻修手术有关(p < 0.001)。输血患者的CCI评分高于非输血患者(P < 0.001)。2016年和2022年,骨水泥RSA的发生率分别为11.7%和49%。不同医院类型和地理区域之间存在差异:虽然近年来骨水泥RSA在肱骨近端骨折中的应用越来越多,也越来越受到关注,但非骨水泥RSA仍占主导地位。这两种方法的选择在很大程度上受地区和医院因素的影响。研究发现,RSA的类型和高CCI评分对手术翻修的风险没有显著影响。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.00%
发文量
85
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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