Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is little information concerning periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. Therefore, we reviewed our experience with these fractures to determine the results of treatment, the risk factors for periprosthetic fracture, and the rates of reoperation. METHODS: Between 1976 and 2001, nineteen postoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures occurred among 3091 patients who had undergone shoulder arthroplasty at our institution. Sixteen patients had a complete series of radiographs and were included in this study. The average time from the arthroplasty to the fracture was forty-nine months. Seven patients had severe osteopenia. Twelve fractures occurred at the tip of the prosthesis; of these, six extended proximally (type-A fractures) and six did not (type-B fractures). Three fractures occurred distal to the implant and extended into the distal humeral metaphysis (type-C fractures). One fracture occurred in the proximal metadiaphyseal region because of osteolysis. RESULTS: Six fractures healed after an average of 180 days of nonoperative treatment. Five fractures were treated operatively after an average of 123 days of unsuccessful nonoperative treatment. The remaining five fractures had immediate operative treatment. All sixteen fractures healed. One patient required multiple operations over a period of three years before union was achieved. With the exclusion of this patient and one other patient who received a custom prosthesis, the average time between the first operative procedure and union was 278 days. CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not clearly indicate the need for operative treatment of type-A fractures unless the humeral component is loose. A trial of nonoperative treatment may be considered for well-aligned type-B fractures that are associated with a well-fixed humeral component; however, operative intervention should be considered for type-B fractures that have not progressed toward union by three months. If the component is well fixed, open reduction and internal fixation may be performed. If the component is loose, revision with a long-stem component is recommended. For type-C fractures, a trial of nonoperative treatment is recommended.     

Periprosthetic humeral fractures in shoulder arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fractures associated with shoulder arthroplasty are uncommon but can be very difficult to treat. Treatment options depend on the timing of the fracture, the type of fracture, and the stability of the implant. Understanding these characteristics of periprosthetic fractures helps the practicing surgeon to avoid them and also to determine how best to manage them when they do occur.     

Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty: operative management and functional outcome

Background  Currently, little information is available on functional outcome of periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. This investigation aimed to evaluate functional and radiological outcome and patients’ satisfaction following this type of injury treated by open reduction and internal fixation. Methods  Retrospective chart analysis of patients treated at two level-I trauma centers. Patients were examined clinically and radiologically. Additionally, functional outcome was assessed using the established DASH-questionnaire and standardized examination for calculation of the Constant score. Results  Five out of six patients showed complete fracture consolidation with satisfying functional results (mean follow up time 62 weeks). One patient showed major complications with poor outcome. DASH and Constant scores were comparable to those described after primary shoulder arthroplasty. Conclusions  Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty can be treated by angular stable plating with low complication rates and acceptable results.     

Periprosthetic humeral fractures after total elbow arthroplasty: treatment with implant revision and strut allograft augmentation

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures are among the most challenging complications of elbow arthroplasty, and published information about the outcome of treatment is limited. The purpose of the present study was to determine the results of implant revision and strut allograft augmentation for the treatment of humeral periprosthetic fractures that occur around a loose humeral component. METHODS: Between 1991 and 1999, eleven periprosthetic fractures that occurred around a loose humeral component were treated with cortical strut allograft augmentation and revision arthroplasty with use of a Coonrad-Morrey semiconstrained implant. Six fractures occurred after a primary arthroplasty, and five occurred after a revision arthroplasty. Two parallel strut grafts were used for fracture fixation in most cases. Patients were followed for an average of three years (range, nine months to 7.8 years) and were evaluated clinically and radiographically. RESULTS: Clinical and radiographic fracture union was obtained in ten of the eleven patients. One patient required revision surgery because of aseptic loosening of the humeral component seven years and nine months after fracture union; there were no other implant failures. Complications included one additional nondisplaced humeral periprosthetic fracture after surgery that failed to heal with closed treatment, one olecranon fracture, one permanent ulnar nerve injury, and one case of triceps insufficiency. At the time of the most recent follow-up, seven of the eight patients with an intact reconstruction had a functional arc of motion and no or slight pain and one had limited motion and moderate pain. CONCLUSIONS: Periprosthetic humeral fractures that are associated with a loose humeral component can be effectively treated with revision elbow arthroplasty and strut allograft augmentation. The technique is associated with a high rate of fracture union, implant survival, and satisfactory clinical results. However, the complication rate is substantial.     

肱骨远端骨折全肘关节成形术

从4篇病例报道与1篇对照试验的研究可以看出,肱骨远端骨折行全肘关节成形术(TEA)效果良好.绝大多数患者TEA后功能结果为优良,很少发生松动、感染等并发症.异位骨化发生率为6%～16%,但是由于多数研究样本量较小、随访期限短,缺乏TEA与开放复位内固定比较的大量研究,因此还不能说TEA优于ORIF.     

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for acute fractures and failed management after proximal humeral fractures

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has a successful clinical record when used for treatment of arthropathy accompanied by rotator cuff insufficiency. Efforts to use the same technology for other conditions involving insufficient cuff function are related to proximal humeral fracture described in this review for which RSA has shown promise are treatment of failed hemiarthroplasty for treatment of proximal humeral fractures and treatment of complex fracture sequelae. Specific conclusions as yet are difficult to reach. Future studies are needed to determine if supplemental soft tissue procedures or modification of implant design will serve to improve functional outcome in this difficult-to-treat subset of patients.     

Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty

The increasing implantation rates of knee arthroplasties are associated with a growing prevalence of complications like periprosthetic fractures. Underlying patient, implant and/or operation technique-related risk factors contribute to these fractures which often occur after minor trauma. In the diagnostic process, fracture dislocation, implant stability, and integrity of the extensor mechanism have to be assessed. Valid classification systems are available to guide treatment decisions. Treatment goals are precise reposition, stable fixation, restoration of function, and early mobilization. In the case of an operative revision, the surgeon has to know the implanted device and has to be prepared for extended procedures and revision arthroplasty. Less invasive fixation devices like retrograde nailing or LISS are often sufficient to stabilize femoral supracondylar fractures, while loosening of the implant often requires extended exchange arthroplasty. Tibial fractures are often associated with osteolysis and bone loss which has to be addressed with bone grafts or augmented revision implants. Long-stemmed implants allow bypassing of the reconstructed defect and provide a stable solution for early mobilization. Patella fractures with stable or asymptomatic implants and continuity of the extensor mechanism should be treated conservatively. If reconstruction becomes necessary, results are often associated with significant functional limitations.     

肱骨近端骨折反置式人工全肩关节置换术与人工肱骨头置换术的比较

SummaryEarly evidence from two small retrospective cohort studies suggests that reverse shoulder arthroplasty appears similar to hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures in an elderly population.One study found no significant differences for either functional outcomes or range of motion at follow-up.The other study found that Constant scores and range of motion may be better for reverse shoulder arthroplasty.However,only retrospective cohort studies were available,so no definitive conclusions can be drawn from these two small 2项小样本回顾性队列研究的结论认为,反置式人工全肩关节置换术(RSA)与人工肱骨头置换术(HA)在治疗老年性肱骨近端骨折方面疗效相当.其中1项研究发现,随访期间两种方法在功能恢复和活动范围改善方面无明显统计学差异.另1项研究则认为经过RSA治疗的患者,Constant肩部评分结果和肩部活动范围的改善要更好.但是,目前的研究结果来自于回顾性队列研究,因此并不能从中得出比较确切的结论.     

Periprosthetic fractures after total knee joint arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fractures of the femur, tibia and patella are being registered with increasing frequency due to the rising numbers of total knee replacements. Depending on the site of the fracture, apart from mere traumatic mechanisms, implant specific parameters and implant loosening may represent the main causes of periprosthetic fracture. Moreover, general risk factors promote the manifestation of a periprosthetic fracture. Nowadays, valid classifications are available to categorize periprosthetic fractures of the femur, tibia and patella, and to create the basis for specific decision-making in choice of treatment. Despite a wide field of treatment options, the actual functional outcome after therapy and the high rates of complications imply that an adequate analysis of the fracture etiology and the corresponding transfer into an individualized treatment concept offer the chance of functional restoration of the patient similar to the pre-fracture state.     

Periprosthetic femoral fractures after total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: The management of periprosthetic fracture following a total hip arthroplasty is difficult, requiring expertise in both trauma and revision surgery. With rising numbers of patients in the population living with hip prostheses in situ, the frequency of these fractures is increasing, and controversy remains over their ideal management. The objective of this study was to review all periprosthetic fractures at a single institution to identify injury and treatment patterns and their associated clinical outcomes. METHODS: Fifty-four periprosthetic fractures in 50 patients were reviewed to determine the relative frequency of fracture types, their complication rates and the clinical outcomes. Patient data were obtained through review of the clinical notes and individual patient follow up. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Oxford Hip Score and Harris Hip Score. RESULTS: The 54 fractures were classified using the Vancouver system, most of which were type B1 (20) or type B2 (10). The mean time to union for all fracture types was 4.6 months. A high non-union rate was seen among fractures fixed operatively. Fifteen per cent of fractures went on to develop loosening following treatment, suggesting an underrecognition at the time of injury. The average Harris Hip Score was 73.1 and Oxford Hip Score 30.3 for all fracture types at a mean follow up of 3.3 years. In the 15 patients treated with revision surgery, the most common complication was dislocation (27%). CONCLUSION: Treatment of patients with periprosthetic fractures requires recognition of the challenging nature of these injuries, the associated poor prognosis and the high complication rate.     

One-stage shoulder and elbow arthroplasty after ipsilateral fractures of the proximal and distal humerus

We report a case of 1-stage ipsilateral shoulder and elbow arthroplasty after comminuted fractures of both joints in a 77-year-old woman. The postoperative course was uneventful, and the patient showed prompt functional improvement and a good clinical result. Despite the higher risk of periprosthetic humeral fracture in cases of ipsilateral shoulder and elbow arthroplasty, the 1-stage procedure may be a promising and reliable solution for the treatment of complex upper limb fractures in elderly inactive patients.     

Periprosthetic fractures about the elbow

As total elbow replacements are being performed more frequently, more periprosthetic fractures are occurring. Although this is a frequent topic of discussion for hips and knees, the literature contains little information to guide treatment of such fractures around the elbow. This article outlines the principles of classification and treatment based on the authors' clinical experience with more than 1000 total elbow arthroplasties.     

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures

Proximal humeral fractures occurring in elderly patients often lead to significant functional disability. The outcome of nonoperative management is disappointing. Treatment with open reduction and internal fixation may result in osteonecrosis of the humeral head, and pain. Hemiarthroplasty is often associated with tuberosity nonunion and poor function. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is an attractive alternative because of the ability of the prosthesis to compensate for tuberosity complications. Early studies have shown promise in using the prosthesis to treat these difficult patients. The next step will require prospective, randomized studies to determine which patient groups derive any benefit from reverse shoulder arthroscopy. The technology should be used judiciously.     

High risk for revision after shoulder arthroplasty for failed osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures

Background and purpose — It is unclear whether previous osteosynthesis is a risk factor for inferior outcome following shoulder arthroplasty for a proximal humeral fracture. We used data from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (DSR) to examine this question.

Patients and methods — All 285 patients treated with a shoulder arthroplasty after failed osteosynthesis of a proximal humeral fracture reported to DSR from 2006 to 2013 were included. Each case was matched with 2 controls (570) treated with a primary shoulder arthroplasty for an acute proximal humeral fracture. Patient reported outcome was assessed using the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder index (WOOS) and the relative risk of revision was reported.

Results — The mean WOOS was 46 (SD 25) for a shoulder arthroplasty after failed osteosynthesis and 52 (27) after a primary shoulder arthroplasty. The relative risk of revision for a shoulder arthroplasty after failed osteosynthesis was 2 with a primary arthroplasty for fracture as reference. In a separate analysis of patients treated by locking plate the mean WOOS was 46 (24), with a relative risk of revision at 1.5 with a primary arthroplasty as reference.

Interpretation — Compared with primary arthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture, we found an inferior patient-reported outcome and a substantial risk of revision for patients treated with a shoulder arthroplasty after failed osteosynthesis for a proximal humeral fracture. The risk and burdens of additional surgery should be accounted for when deciding on the primary surgical procedure.     

Periprosthetic humeral fractures: management and classification

Six patients (67 to 94 years of age) sustained a periprosthetic humeral fracture at an average of 43 months after shoulder arthroplasty (range 13 to 85 months). These fractures were classified depending on fracture anatomy and implant stability. Type A fractures occur about the tuberosities. Type B fractures occur about the stem and are subclassified by fracture anatomy and implant stability: B1 fractures are spiral fractures with a stable implant, B2 fractures are transverse or short oblique fractures about the tip of the stem with a stable implant, and B3 fractures are those fractures about the stem with an unstable implant. Type C fractures occur well distal to the tip of the stem. Five of the 6 fractures required surgery, 4 with revision to a long-stemmed component. All fractures united with restoration of range of motion and function. Satisfactory results may be anticipated if these fractures are managed in an appropriate fashion.     

Periprosthetic fractures of the femur after total knee arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fracture following total knee arthroplasty is a potentially serious complication. This injury can involve the distal femur, proximal tibia or the patella. This review article analyzes the prevalence, risk factors, classification and treatment options for periprosthetic fractures of the femur.