Minimally Invasive Surgical Method for Fractures of the Proximal Humerus

Authors

  • Ap Alimov Republican Specialized Scientific and Practical Medical Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics Ministry of Health of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent City
  • Sy Yusupov Republican Specialized Scientific and Practical Medical Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics Ministry of Health of the Republic of Uzbekistan, Tashkent City
  • Sk Hakimov Bukhara State Medical Institute, Bukhara City, Bukhara Branch of the Republican Scientific Center for Emergency Medical Aid, Bukhara City

Keywords:

humerus, proximal humerus fractures, osteosynthesis, plate

Abstract

Purpose of work was improving treatment outcomes by developing an extramedullary minimally invasive method in fractures of the proximal portion of the humerus.

Materials of the scientific work is devoted to clinical dada of 55 patients with multiple fragment fractures of the proximal portion of the humerus. The Neer (1970) classification was used to assess the severity of the injury and the condition of the bone fragments. Most patients fall into the category of surgical fracture of the humerus, of these, 8 (14.6%) were single-fragment fractures, 14 (25.3%) were double-fragmented, 15 (27.3%) were three-fragmented, and the remaining 18 (32.8%) were multi-fragmented fractures. All patients made surgery using new operative technique using an extramedullary minimally invasive method with Ilizarov apparatus and atraumatic threads in different directions through the rotator cuff muscles of the shoulder attached to the bone fragments for the ideal repositioning of the bone fragments.

Results. Out of a total of 55 patients, 47 (85.4%) had a total score above 90 and were rated as good outcomes. Satisfactory results were obtained in 5 (9.2%) patients with the total score about 80 - 89. The satisfactory results were explained by the limitation of the amplitude of movement up to 10 degrees in the shoulder joint. In the remaining 3 (5.4%) patients, an unsatisfactory result was observed, the total score was less than 80, i.e., the presence of pain syndrome in the shoulder joint in these cases, limitation of range of motion to 15 degrees, and was explained by the presence of signs of osteoarthritis in the control X-ray image. After the surgery, all patients underwent shoulder rotator cuff restorative treatments for the prevention of "impingement syndrome", on the 21-25th day after the surgery, therapeutic physical exercises for the shoulder joint were started.

Conclusions.

Discussions on the choice of treatment for fractures of the proximal part of the humerus are growing. The proposed method of minimally invasive osteosynthesis in fractures of the proximal part of the humerus allows for less traumatic reposition of bone fragments, stable fixation of bone fragments. The proposed method of minimally invasive osteosynthesis allowed to increase the share of good and satisfactory results to 94.5%, as well as to improve the quality of life of patients.

References

Keener J. D., Parsons B. O., Flatow E. L., Rogers K., Williams G. R., Galatz L. M. Outcomes after percutaneous reduction and fixation of proximal humeral fractures. J. Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2007; 6: 330–338.

Loskutov A. E., et al. Differencirovannye podhody k operativnomu lecheniyu bol`nyh s povrezhdeniyami proksimal`nogo otdela plechevoi kosti [Different approaches to surgical treatment of patients with damages of proximal humerus]. Ortopediya, traumotologiya i protezirovanie [Orthopaedics, traumatology and prosthetics], 2007; 1: 33–38.

C.M., et al. Modern perspectives of open reduction and plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures. J.Orthop. Trauma, 2011; 25(10): 618-629.

Sun J.C., et al. Treatment of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures with locking proximal humerus plate. Eur. J. Orthop. Surg. Traumatol, 2013; 23(6): 699-704.

Rothstock S., et al. Biomechanical evaluation of two intramedullary nailing techniques with different locking options in a three-part fracture proximal humerus model. Clin. Biomech. Bristol, Avon, 2012; 27(7): 686-691.

Den Hartog D, et al. Primary shoulder arthroplasty versus conservative treatment for comminuted proximal humeral fractures: a systematic literature review. Open Orthop. J, 2010; 4: 87-92.

Brunner A., et al. Minimally invasive percutaneous plating of proximal humeral shaft fractures with the Proximal Humerus Internal Locking System (PHILOS). J. Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2012; 21(8): 1056-1063.

Dilisio MF, et al. Intramedullary nailing of the proximal humerus: evolution, technique, and results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2016; 25(5): 130-e138. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.11.016.

Zhu Y, Lu Y, Shen J, Zhang J, Jiang C. Locking intramedullary nails and locking plates in the treatment of two-part proximal humeral surgical neck fractures: a prospective randomized trial with a minimum of three years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2011; 93(2): 159-168. doi:10.2106/JBJS.J.00155.

Gavaskar AS, Karthik BB, Tummala NC, Srinivasan P, Gopalan H. Second generation locked plating for complex proximal humerus fractures in very elderly patients. Injury, 2016; 47(11): 2534-2538. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2016.08.010.

Wong J, Newman JM, Gruson KI. Outcomes of intramedullary nailing for acute proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review. J Orthop Traumatol, 2016; 17: 113–122.

Magovern B, et al. Percutaneous fixation of proximal humerus fractures. Orthop Clin North Am, 2008; 39: 405–416.

Yang K. H. Helical plate fixation for treatment of comminuted fractures of the proximal and middle one-third of the humerus // Injury, 2005; 36: 75–80.

Martin C., Guillen M., Lopez G. Treatment of 2- and 3-part fractures of the proximal humerus using external fixation: a retrospective evaluation of 62 patients // Acta Orthop, 2006; 77: 275–278.

Minayev A.N., Gorodnichenko A.I., Uskov O.N. The transosseous osteosynthesis by proximal metaepiphyseal fractures of humerus in elderly patients. Khirurgiya, 2010; (1): 50–53. (In Russian).

Gurkin B.E., et al. Basis for choice of treatment of patients with fracture of the proximal humeral. Kubanskiy nauchnyy meditsinskiy vestnik, 2015; (2): 49–56. (In Russian).

Slobodskoy A.B., et al. Morphological changes in the head of the humerus in acute injury of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. In: Ilizarov readings: materials of the scientific and practical conference with international participation. Kurgan, 2011: 260–261. (In Russian).

Robinson B.C., et al. Classification and imaging of proximal humerus fractures. Orthop Clin North Am, 2008; 39(4): 393–403. DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2008.05.002.

Skoroglyadov A.V., et al. Possibility of Ultrasound Diagnosis for Visualization of Peripheral Nerves of and Forearm. Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii imeni NN Priorova, 2008; (2): 64–69. (In Russian).

Mora Guix J.M., et al. Classification System for Proximal Humeral Fractures. Clin Med Res, 2009; 7(1–2): 32–44. DOI: 10.3121/cmr.2009.779.

Kogan PG, et al. [Treatment evolution of proximal humeral fractures (literature review)]. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii [Traumatology and Orthopaedics of Russia], 2013; (3): 154-161.

Murylev V, Imamkuliev a, Elizarov P, Korshev O, Kutuzov a. [Surgical treatment of extraarticular fractures of the proximal humerus]. Vrach [Physician], 2014; (11): 10-13.

Iyengar JJ, Devcic Z, Sproul RC, feeley BT. Nonoperative treatment of proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review. J Orthop Trauma, 2011; 25(10): 612-617.

Buecking B., et al. Deltoid-split or Deltopectoral Approaches for the Displaced proximal humeral fractures? // Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res, 2014; 47: 1576-1585.

Boudard G.,et al. Locking plate fixation versus antegrade nailing of 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures in patients without osteoporosis. Comparative retrospective study of 63 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2014; 100(8): 917–924. DOI: 10.1016/ j.otsr.2014.09.021.

Lekic N., et al. Treatment of two-part proximal humerus fractures: intramedullary nail compared to locked plating. HSS J, 2012; 8(2): 86–91. DOI: 10.1007/s11420-012-9274-z.

Eldzarov P.E.,et al. Surgical treatment of consequences of femoral fractures. Khirurgiya, 2010; (9): 47–52. (In Russian).

Minayev A.N., et al. The transosseous osteosynthesis by proximal metaepiphyseal fractures of humerus in elderly patients. Khirurgiya, 2010; (1): 50–53. (In Russian).

Mora Guix J.M.,et al. Updated Classification System for Proximal Humeral Fractures. Clin Med Res, 2009; 7(1–2): 32–44. DOI: 10.3121/cmr.2009.779.

Duralde X.A., et al. The results of ORIF of displaced unstable proximal humeral fractures using a locking plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2010; 19(4): 480–488. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.08.008.

Pritchett J.W. Inferior subluxation of the humeral head after trauma or surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 1997; 6(4): 356–359. PMID: 9285875.

Downloads

Published

2024-06-28

How to Cite

Alimov, A., Yusupov, S., & Hakimov, S. (2024). Minimally Invasive Surgical Method for Fractures of the Proximal Humerus. International Journal of Alternative and Contemporary Therapy, 2(6), 140–148. Retrieved from http://medicaljournals.eu/index.php/IJACT/article/view/707