Prognosis of locking plate versus ordinary steel plate fixation for proximal humeral fractures

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2015.26.022

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Proximal humeral fractures are commonly treated by open reduction and internal fixation, which greatly injuries tissue and noticeably damages local blood supply. However, with the development of material and progress of repair method, complications have obviously reduced.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the difference of locking plate and ordinary steel plate in the repair of proximal humeral fractures.
METHODS: A total of 68 patients with great displacement and comminuted proximal humeral fractures, who were treated in the Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Tongren Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine from February 2012 to October 2014, were enrolled in this study. According to fixation method, they were divided into two groups. 32 cases in the locking plate group were subjected to locking plate, and 36 cases in the ordinary steel plate group received fixation with T type plate and Clover plate. They were followed up at the out-patient clinic at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 weeks after treatment. The satisfaction rate of shoulder function treatment was assessed using Neer scoring system. They received reexamination before withdrawal of fixator. The incidence of complications was observed in patients.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The satisfaction rate was significantly lower in the ordinary steel plate group than in the locking plate group (75%, 81%, P < 0.05). No screw and plate breakage, shoulder seam impact, humeral head necrosis or infection was found in the locking plate group. Six cases suffered from pain. In the ordinary steel plate group, there were screw and plate breakage in five cases, shoulder seam impact in five cases, pain in eight cases, humeral head necrosis in two cases and infection in two cases. The incidence of complications was significantly greater in the ordinary steel plate group than in the locking plate group (P < 0.05). These data suggest that locking plate can be used as the first choice for internal fixation in treatment of proximal humeral fractures. No matter satisfaction rate of repair or complications, it is better than ordinary steel plate fixation.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程

Key words: Humerus, Fractures, Bone, Internal Fixators, Follow-Up Studies

CLC Number:

R318

Bai Jian-zhong, Hou Bo, Shi Hui-feng, Yang Wei, Xu Gang, Liang Chao-ge. Prognosis of locking plate versus ordinary steel plate fixation for proximal humeral fractures[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2015, 19(26): 4213-4217.

Figures/Tables 4

References

[1] 王冠军,张春才,许硕贵.肱骨近端骨折的治疗进展[J].外国医学.骨科学分册,2004,25(4):216-218.
[2] Neer CS. Four-segment classification of proximal humeralfractures:purpose and reliable use. Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):389-400．
[3] Wijgman AJ,Roolker W, Patt TW,et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of three and four-part fractures of the proximal part of the humerus. J Bone joint surg Am. 2002;84(11): 1919-1925.
[4] Pehlivan O,Yilmaz S,Kiral A,et al. [Evaluation of biomechanical rigidity of K-wire configurations in transverse osteotomies: a comparison of four-point bending test results]. Acta Orthop Traumatol Ture. 2003;37(5):395-399.
[5] Raissadat K,Struben PJ,van Loon CJ. Helix wire osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures: unacceptable nonunion rate in two- and three-part fractures. Arch orthop Trauma Surg. 2004;124(3):166-168.
[6] Bathis H, Tingarl M,Bouillon B,et al.Surgicaltratment of proximal humeral fractures is the T-plate still adequate steeosynthesis procedure. Zentralbl Chir. 2001;126:211-216.
[7] 张磊,杨海涛,曹前来,等.锁定钢板与常规手术治疗肱骨近端骨折疗效比较[J].中华矫形外科杂志,2004,12(10):728-731.
[8] Ring D.Current concepts in plate and screw fixation of Osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures. Injury. 2007;38 (Suppl 3):59-68.
[9] Nho SJ,Brophy RH,Barker JU,et al．Management of proximal humeral fractures based on current literature. J BoneJoint Surg(Am). 2007;89(Suppl 3):44-58.
[10] Voigt C,Hurschler C,Rech L,et al.Additive fiber cerclages inp roximal humeral fractures stabilized by locking plates. Acta Orthop. 2009;33(1):127.
[11] Papadopoulos P,Karataglis D,Stavridis SJ,et al. Mid-termresults of internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures withthe Philos pate．Injury. 2009; 40(12):1292-1296．
[12] 文良元,薛庆云,黄公怡,等.老年肱骨近端骨折的内固定治疗[J].中华骨科杂志,2004,24(11):641-644.
[13] 侯之启,陈铭,戈涛,等.MIPPO技术LCP钢板内固定治疗老年肱骨近端骨折[J].骨与关节损伤杂志,2004,19(11):736-738.
[14] Friedman RJ. Humeral technique in total shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998;29(3):393-402.
[15] Prakash U,McGurty DW,Dent JA. Hemiarthroplasty for severe fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shouder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(5):428-430.
[16] Owsley KC,Gorczyca JT.Fracture displacement and screw cutout after open reduction and locked plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures. J Bone Joint Sur Am. 2008;90(2): 233-240.
[17] Yang P, Zhang Y, Liu J, et al. Biomechanical effect of medial cortical support and medial screw support on locking plate fixation in proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap: a finite element analysis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2015; 49(2):203-209.
[18] Sano H, Kamimura M, Oizumi A, et al. Secondary subacromial impingement after valgus closing-wedge osteotomy for proximal humerus varus.Case Rep Orthop. 2015;2015:652096.
[19] Chiewchantanakit S, Tangsripong P. Locking plate fixation of proximal humeral fracture: minimally invasive vs. standard delto-pectoral approach. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015;98(2): 196-200.
[20] Königshausen M, Thierbach A, Kübler L, et al.[Surgical treatment of 3- and 4-part fractures of the humeral head using a polyaxial-locking plate: results and patient satisfaction]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2015;153(1):51-58.
[21] Zhang F, Zhu L, Yang D, et al. Comparison between the spatial subchondral support plate and the proximal humeral locking plate in the treatment of unstable proximal humeral fractures. Int Orthop. 2015;39(6):1167-1173.
[22] Schliemann B, Hartensuer R, Koch T, et al. Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with a CFR-PEEK plate: 2-year results of a prospective study and comparison to fixation with a conventional locking plate. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015. pii: S1058-2746(15)00014-2.
[23] Liu K, Liu PC, Liu R, et al. Advantage of minimally invasive lateral approach relative to conventional deltopectoral approach for treatment of proximal humerus fractures. Med Sci Monit. 2015;21:496-504.
[24] Dai ZS, Huang JM, Zhuang XR, et al.[Case-control study on suture-assisted locking plate for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures in elderly]. Zhongguo Gu Shang. 2014; 27(12):1015-1018.
[25] Hinds RM, Garner MR, Tran WH, et al. Geriatric proximal humeral fracture patients show similar clinical outcomes to non-geriatric patients after osteosynthesis with endosteal fibular strut allograft augmentation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015;24(6):889-896.
[26] Erasmo R, Guerra G, Guerra L.Fractures and fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus: A retrospective analysis of 82 cases treated with the Philos(®) locking plate. Injury. 2014;45 Suppl 6:S43-48.
[27] Boudard G, Pomares G, Milin L, 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.