Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Osteoporosis International 2/2005

01-03-2005 | Review

Fractures of the proximal humerus in osteoporotic bone

Author: Prof. Dr. med. Ralph Hertel

Published in: Osteoporosis International | Special Issue 2/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this article was to review critically the current treatment options for fractures of the proximal humerus in patients with severe osteoporosis. The main difficulties lie in correctly diagnosing the fracture and hence selecting the most appropriate method of treatment. The reliability of the diagnosis can be increased by systematically appending additional information to a basic fracture classification. Classification is best carried out on a morphological basis, whereby a descriptor of bone quality can be added in order to introduce the degree of osteoporosis into the decision-making algorithm. Any classification system that claims to provide both treatment and prognosis is inappropriate, because prognosis will depend hopefully on the treatment. Approaches to treatment differ widely amongst centers and surgeons. It is still unclear as to what would be the optimal treatment. Factors such as the individual’s functional requirements and ability to cooperate should be given careful consideration. At our institution, hemiarthroplasty is the method of choice for ischemic humeral heads and/or when anatomic reconstruction cannot be obtained. In all other displaced fractures, the main objective is preservation of the head since the best functional results can generally be obtained with internal fixation. Selection of a balanced osteosynthesis, adapted to the weak bone, is mandatory. Bulky, stiff implants are inadequate and may cause additional damage. Load sharing, not load bearing, compound constructions are the aim. Obtaining metaphyseal elastic buttressing is the key element in achieving the necessary load-sharing fixation. The system should allow controlled impaction and be forgiving towards occasional load peaks that will occur and are beyond patient control. Thin and flexible implants are required to realize this type of fixation. Given the polypragmatic approach that is current in clinical practice there is room for further improvement of techniques and implants.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Sallay PI, Pedowitz RA, Mallon WJ, Vandemark RM, Dalton JD, Speer KP (1997) Reliability and reproducibility of radiographic interpretation of proximal humeral fracture pathoanatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 6:60–69CrossRefPubMed Sallay PI, Pedowitz RA, Mallon WJ, Vandemark RM, Dalton JD, Speer KP (1997) Reliability and reproducibility of radiographic interpretation of proximal humeral fracture pathoanatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 6:60–69CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Neer CS, 2nd (1970) Displaced proximal humeral fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:1077–1089PubMed Neer CS, 2nd (1970) Displaced proximal humeral fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:1077–1089PubMed
3.
go back to reference Misra A, Kapur R, Maffulli N (2001) Complex proximal humeral fractures in adults—a systematic review of management. Injury 32:363–372CrossRefPubMed Misra A, Kapur R, Maffulli N (2001) Complex proximal humeral fractures in adults—a systematic review of management. Injury 32:363–372CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Zyto K (1998) Non-operative treatment of comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. Injury 29:349–352CrossRefPubMed Zyto K (1998) Non-operative treatment of comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. Injury 29:349–352CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Zyto K, Wallace WA, Frostick SP, Preston BJ (1998) Outcome after hemiarthroplasty for three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 7:85–89CrossRefPubMed Zyto K, Wallace WA, Frostick SP, Preston BJ (1998) Outcome after hemiarthroplasty for three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 7:85–89CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Codmann EA (1934) Fractures in relation to the subacromial bursa. In: Codmann EA (ed) The shoulder, rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. Krieger, Malabar, Florida, pp 313–331 Codmann EA (1934) Fractures in relation to the subacromial bursa. In: Codmann EA (ed) The shoulder, rupture of the supraspinatus tendon and other lesions in or about the subacromial bursa. Krieger, Malabar, Florida, pp 313–331
7.
go back to reference Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M, Leunig M (2003) Predictors of humeral head ischemia following intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg (in press) Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M, Leunig M (2003) Predictors of humeral head ischemia following intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg (in press)
8.
go back to reference Hertel R, Mees C, Schöll E, Ballmer FT, Siebenrock K (2001) Morphologic classification of fractures of the proximal humerus. A validated, teachable and practicable alternative. Eighth International Conference on Shoulder Surgery (ICSS), 23–26 April. Cape Town, South Africa Hertel R, Mees C, Schöll E, Ballmer FT, Siebenrock K (2001) Morphologic classification of fractures of the proximal humerus. A validated, teachable and practicable alternative. Eighth International Conference on Shoulder Surgery (ICSS), 23–26 April. Cape Town, South Africa
9.
go back to reference Tingart MJ, Apreleva M, von Stechow D, Zurakowski D, Warner JJ (2003) The cortical thickness of the proximal humeral diaphysis predicts bone mineral density of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:611–617CrossRefPubMed Tingart MJ, Apreleva M, von Stechow D, Zurakowski D, Warner JJ (2003) The cortical thickness of the proximal humeral diaphysis predicts bone mineral density of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:611–617CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Park MC, Murthi AM, Roth NS, Blaine TA, Levine WN, Bigliani LU (2003) Two-part and three-part fractures of the proximal humerus treated with suture fixation. J Orthop Trauma 17:319–325 Park MC, Murthi AM, Roth NS, Blaine TA, Levine WN, Bigliani LU (2003) Two-part and three-part fractures of the proximal humerus treated with suture fixation. J Orthop Trauma 17:319–325
11.
go back to reference Jaberg H, Warner JJ, Jakob RP (1992) Percutaneous stabilization of unstable fractures of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:508–515PubMed Jaberg H, Warner JJ, Jakob RP (1992) Percutaneous stabilization of unstable fractures of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:508–515PubMed
12.
13.
go back to reference Resch H, Huebner C, Schwaiger R (2001) Minimally invasive reduction and osteosynthesis of articular fractures of the humeral head. Injury 32:SA25–32CrossRefPubMed Resch H, Huebner C, Schwaiger R (2001) Minimally invasive reduction and osteosynthesis of articular fractures of the humeral head. Injury 32:SA25–32CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Szyszkowitz R, Schippinger G (1999) [Fractures of the proximal humerus]. Unfallchirurg 102:422–428CrossRefPubMed Szyszkowitz R, Schippinger G (1999) [Fractures of the proximal humerus]. Unfallchirurg 102:422–428CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Lill H, Hepp P, Korner J, Kassi JP, Verheyden AP, Josten C, Duda GN (2003) Proximal humeral fractures: how stiff should an implant be? A comparative mechanical study with new implants in human specimens. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 123:74–81PubMed Lill H, Hepp P, Korner J, Kassi JP, Verheyden AP, Josten C, Duda GN (2003) Proximal humeral fractures: how stiff should an implant be? A comparative mechanical study with new implants in human specimens. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 123:74–81PubMed
Metadata
Title
Fractures of the proximal humerus in osteoporotic bone
Author
Prof. Dr. med. Ralph Hertel
Publication date
01-03-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Osteoporosis International / Issue Special Issue 2/2005
Print ISSN: 0937-941X
Electronic ISSN: 1433-2965
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00198-004-1714-2

Other articles of this Special Issue 2/2005

Osteoporosis International 2/2005 Go to the issue