首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Open reduction internal fixation vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of acute displaced proximal humerus fractures
Institution:1. OrthoCincy Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine, St. Elizabeth Healthcare, The Orthopaedic Research & Innovation Foundation, Inc., 560 South Loop Road, Edgewood, KY 41017, USA;2. OrthoCincy Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine, Highland Heights, KY, USA;3. Lake Erie College Of Medicine Orthopedics, Erie, PA, USA;4. St. Elizabeth Healthcare, Clinical Research Institute, The Orthopaedic Research & Innovation Foundation, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, USA;5. OrthoCincy Orthopaedics & Sports Medicine, St. Elizabeth Healthcare, Edgewood, KY, USA;1. New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA, USA;2. Boston Sports and Shoulder Center, Waltham, MA, USA;3. Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA;4. Dell Medical School, Austin, TX, USA
Abstract:BackgroundProximal humerus fractures are a frequent fragility fracture in the aging population and represent a challenge to the orthopedic surgeon. Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of these fractures is viable but technically challenging and associated with a high complication rate. Recently, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) with tuberosity repair has become a popular and successful option for treating these fractures. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of ORIF and RTSA for treatment of proximal humerus fractures.MethodsAn age-matched group of 50 patients treated with ORIF (25) and RTSA (25) were assessed at an average follow-up of 4.4 years. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES) and Simple Shoulder Test (SST), radiographs, range of motion, and complications were evaluated between the two groups.ResultsThe reoperation rate and major complications were higher in the ORIF group compared to RTSA. No major complications were observed in the RTSA group. Forward flexion in the RTSA patients (143.2 ± 23.1) was shown to be significantly greater than ORIF patients (121.4 ± 35.1) (p= 0.0125) but no significant differences were observed for shoulder external rotation or internal rotation. There was no difference in ASES and SST scores between groups.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates good clinical outcomes for both RTSA and ORIF. However, reoperation rate was higher with ORIF with locked plating compared to RTSA for fracture with tuberosity repair in an age matched population. RTSA may be a better treatment option than ORIF for 3- and 4-part fractures in patients older than 65.Level of evidenceLevel III
Keywords:
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号