Intramedullary versus locking plate fixation for proximal humerus fractures: indications and technical considerations

{"title":"Intramedullary versus locking plate fixation for proximal humerus fractures: indications and technical considerations","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.xrrt.2024.01.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>The incidence of proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) continues to increase with an aging population, and intramedullary nailing (IMN) and locking plate fixation are two commonly employed techniques for the surgical management of PHF. However, the optimal fixation method can be a source of ongoing controversy. Some influencing factors include the extent of humeral head involvement, fracture complexity, patient age, and surgeon preference. There are many studies that provide a mix of data either when comparing the two techniques or analyzing them in isolation. The aim of this review is to further elucidate the indications and technical considerations involved specifically in IMN vs. locking plate fixation for PHF to further aid orthopedic surgeons when choosing surgical management.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A narrative approach was chosen for this review allowing for a comprehensive review of literature, including recent findings pertaining to the comparison of management options for PHF. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. The inclusion criteria involved studies that discussed “proximal humerus fracture” and either “intramedullary nail” or “locking plate fixation.”</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Complications such as avascular necrosis, hardware failure, additional surgical interventions, infection, fracture redisplacement, rotator cuff rupture, and nonunion did not show significant differences between the two groups. Newer generation humeral nails have minimized early complications. As both techniques undergo further refinement and utilization when specifically indicated, functional outcomes, potential complications, and postoperative pain continue to be improved.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The available evidence suggests that both intramedullary nails and locking plates can effectively restore shoulder function in the treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures, with unclear superiority of either method. The choice of technique should be tailored to patient factors such as fracture type, age, bone quality, and functional expectations. Surgeon experience also plays a role. While certain presentations may exhibit trends that favor one fixation, no specific technique can be universally recommended. Both IMN and LP have shown comparable and satisfactory outcomes, and the final fixation method chosen should take into account the unique characteristics of each patient.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74030,"journal":{"name":"JSES reviews, reports, and techniques","volume":"4 3","pages":"Pages 615-624"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666639124000154/pdfft?md5=526d5cbc650f5f00c05d2c7df02f8311&pid=1-s2.0-S2666639124000154-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JSES reviews, reports, and techniques","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666639124000154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The incidence of proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) continues to increase with an aging population, and intramedullary nailing (IMN) and locking plate fixation are two commonly employed techniques for the surgical management of PHF. However, the optimal fixation method can be a source of ongoing controversy. Some influencing factors include the extent of humeral head involvement, fracture complexity, patient age, and surgeon preference. There are many studies that provide a mix of data either when comparing the two techniques or analyzing them in isolation. The aim of this review is to further elucidate the indications and technical considerations involved specifically in IMN vs. locking plate fixation for PHF to further aid orthopedic surgeons when choosing surgical management.

Methods

A narrative approach was chosen for this review allowing for a comprehensive review of literature, including recent findings pertaining to the comparison of management options for PHF. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. The inclusion criteria involved studies that discussed “proximal humerus fracture” and either “intramedullary nail” or “locking plate fixation.”

Results

Complications such as avascular necrosis, hardware failure, additional surgical interventions, infection, fracture redisplacement, rotator cuff rupture, and nonunion did not show significant differences between the two groups. Newer generation humeral nails have minimized early complications. As both techniques undergo further refinement and utilization when specifically indicated, functional outcomes, potential complications, and postoperative pain continue to be improved.

Conclusion

The available evidence suggests that both intramedullary nails and locking plates can effectively restore shoulder function in the treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures, with unclear superiority of either method. The choice of technique should be tailored to patient factors such as fracture type, age, bone quality, and functional expectations. Surgeon experience also plays a role. While certain presentations may exhibit trends that favor one fixation, no specific technique can be universally recommended. Both IMN and LP have shown comparable and satisfactory outcomes, and the final fixation method chosen should take into account the unique characteristics of each patient.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
髓内固定与锁定钢板固定治疗肱骨近端骨折:适应症和技术考虑因素
背景随着人口老龄化,肱骨近端骨折(PHF)的发病率持续上升,髓内钉(IMN)和锁定钢板固定是两种常用的 PHF 手术治疗技术。然而,最佳的固定方法一直存在争议。一些影响因素包括肱骨头受累程度、骨折复杂程度、患者年龄和外科医生的偏好。许多研究在比较两种技术或单独分析两种技术时都提供了不同的数据。本综述旨在进一步阐明IMN与锁定钢板固定治疗PHF的适应症和技术注意事项,以进一步帮助骨科医生选择手术治疗方法。方法本综述选择了叙述式方法,以便对文献进行全面综述,包括有关PHF治疗方案比较的最新研究结果。我们使用 PubMed、Embase 和 Cochrane Library 数据库进行了全面的文献检索。结果两组患者的并发症,如血管性坏死、硬件故障、额外的手术干预、感染、骨折再移位、肩袖断裂和不愈合并无显著差异。新一代肱骨钉已将早期并发症降至最低。结论 现有证据表明,在治疗移位的肱骨近端骨折时,髓内钉和锁定钢板都能有效恢复肩关节功能,但两种方法的优劣尚不明确。应根据患者的骨折类型、年龄、骨质和功能期望等因素选择合适的技术。外科医生的经验也起着重要作用。虽然某些病例可能表现出倾向于一种固定方法的趋势,但没有一种特定的技术可以被普遍推荐。IMN和LP都显示出令人满意的效果,最终选择的固定方法应考虑到每位患者的独特性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Long head of biceps tendon management in the setting of massive rotator cuff tears Glenohumeral capsular injury rate in patients with glenohumeral instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis The effect of preemptive middle glenohumeral ligament release, following release of the rotator interval and coracohumeral ligament, in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of small- to medium-sized tears to prevent postoperative stiffness: a retrospective comparative study Arthroscopic reduction internal fixation for displaced radial head fractures: a systematic review of the outcomes and complications Variability of rehabilitation protocols for ulnar collateral ligament repair with suture tape augmentation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1