Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background and hypothesis The typical anterolateral approach is widely used to treat proximal humerus fractures with lateral locking fixation. However, lateral fixation cannot completely avoid medial reduction loss and varus deformity especially in the cases of an unstable medial column. We present a novel medial surgical approach and technique together with a minimally invasive lateral locking plate to fix proximal humerus fractures with an unstable medial column. Materials and methods We performed an anatomical study and reported 8 cases of proximal humerus fractures with unstable medial columns treated with plate fixation through a minimally invasive anterolateral approach and medial approach. All surgeries were performed by the same single surgeon. Patients were followed clinically and radiographically at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results There was a safe region located at the medial part of the proximal humerus just beneath the articular surface. An anatomical medial locking proximal humerus plate could be placed in the medial column and did not affect the axillary nerve, blood supply of the humeral head, or stability of the shoulder joint. Successful fracture healing was achieved in all 8 cases. The function and range of motion of the shoulder joint were satisfactory 24 months postoperatively, with an average Constant score (CS) of 82.8. No reduction loss (≥ 10° in any direction), screw cutout, nonunion, or deep infection occurred. Conclusions The combined application of medial anatomical locking plate fixation and minimally invasive lateral locking plate fixation is effective in maintaining operative reduction and preventing varus collapse and implant failure in proximal humerus fractures with an unstable medial column.
Background and hypothesis The typical anterolateral approach is widely used to treat proximal humerus fractures with lateral locking fixation. However, lateral fixation cannot completely avoid medial reduction loss and varus deformity especially in the cases of an unstable medial column. We present a novel medial surgical approach and technique together with a minimally invasive lateral locking plate to fix proximal humerus fractures with an unstable medial column. Materials and methods We performed an anatomical study and reported 8 cases of proximal humerus fractures with unstable medial columns treated with plate fixation through a minimally invasive anterolateral approach and medial approach. All surgeries were performed by the same single surgeon. Patients were followed clinically and radiographically at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Results There was a safe region located at the medial part of the proximal humerus just beneath the articular surface. An anatomical medial locking proximal humerus plate could be placed in the medial column and did not affect the axillary nerve, blood supply of the humeral head, or stability of the shoulder joint. Successful fracture healing was achieved in all 8 cases. The function and range of motion of the shoulder joint were satisfactory 24 months postoperatively, with an average Constant score (CS) of 82.8. No reduction loss (≥ 10° in any direction), screw cutout, nonunion, or deep infection occurred. Conclusions The combined application of medial anatomical locking plate fixation and minimally invasive lateral locking plate fixation is effective in maintaining operative reduction and preventing varus collapse and implant failure in proximal humerus fractures with an unstable medial column.
Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of a non-locking plate applied to the anteromedial surface of the proximal humerus on loads at the implant-bone interface of non-locking and locking lateral plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with a medial gap. Methods Twenty synthetic humeri models were used. In fifteen, the proximal portion of the humerus was osteotomized to create a two-part surgical neck fracture, with a 10-mm medial gap and a 5-mm lateral gap; five models were controls. In the osteotomized humeri, five models were stabilized with a locking lateral plate (group L), five with a locking lateral plate and an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T), and five with a non-locking lateral plate and a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T). All humeri were tested under axial loading until catastrophic failure, which was characterized as complete closure of the medial gap. Stiffness was calculated using force vs. displacement curves. The data were analyzed via descriptive and inferential studies, at a 5% significance level. Results Statistically significant differences were seen among all the constructions. The combination of a lateral locking plate with an anteromedial non-locking plate (group L+T) was the stiffest construction, while the combination of a non-locking lateral plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate (group T+T) was the least stiff, even in comparison with a single locking lateral plate (p = 0.01). When the two groups which utilized a lateral locking plate (groups L+T and L) were compared, the group with additional anteromedial support demonstrated greater stiffness (p = 0.03), and stiffness values for the control group comprised of intact humeri models were even higher (p = 0.01). Conclusion Combining a lateral locking plate with a non-locking anteromedial plate provides a stiffer construction for fixation of unstable two-part proximal humerus fractures with a medial gap. Mechanical benefits of medial support with a second non-locking antero-medial plate seems to be related with better construct stability in terms of strength and fatigue, potentially reducing the risk of varus collapse of the humerus head and fracture healing disturbances.
Background:Technical aspects of the correct placement of medial support locking screws in the locking plate for proximal humerus fractures remain incompletely understood. This study was to evaluate the clinical relationship between the number of medial support screws and the maintenance of fracture reduction after locked plating of proximal humerus fractures.Methods:We retrospectively evaluated 181 patients who had been surgically treated for proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) with a locking plate between September 2007 and June 2013. All cases were then subdivided into one of four groups as follows: 75 patients in the medial cortical support (MCS) group, 26 patients in the medial multiscrew support (MMSS) group, 29 patients in the medial single screw support (MSSS) group, and 51 patients in the no medial support (NMS) group. Clinical and radiographic evaluations included the Constant-Murley score (CM), visual analogue scale (VAS), complications, and revision surgeries. The neck-shaft angle (NSA) was measured in a true anteroposterior radiograph immediately postoperation and at final follow-up. One-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis test was used for statistical analysis of measurement data, and Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used for categorical data.Results:The mean postoperative NSAs were 133.46° ± 6.01°, 132.39° ± 7.77°, 135.17° ± 10.15°, and 132.41° ± 7.16° in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively, and no significant differences were found (F = 1.02, P = 0.387). In the final follow-up, the NSAs were 132.79° ± 6.02°, 130.19° ± 9.25°, 131.28° ± 12.85°, and 127.35° ± 8.50° in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively (F = 4.40, P = 0.008). There were marked differences in the NSA at the final follow-up between the MCS and NMS groups (P = 0.004). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) NSA losses were 0.0° (0.0–1.0)°, 1.3° (0.0–3.1)°, 1.5° (1.0–5.2)°, and 4.0° (1.2–7.1)° in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively (H = 60.66, P < 0.001). There were marked differences in NSA loss between the MCS and the other three groups (MCS vs. MMSS, Z = 3.16, P = 0.002; MCS vs. MSSS, Z = 4.78, P < 0.001; and MCS vs. NMS, Z = 7.34, P < 0.001). There was also significantly less NSA loss observed in the MMSS group compared to the NMS group (Z = −3.16, P = 0.002). However, there were no significant differences between the MMSS and MSSS groups (Z = −1.65, P = 0.225) or the MSSS and NMS groups (Z = −1.21, P = 0.099). The average CM scores were 81.35 ± 9.79, 78.04 ± 8.97, 72.76 ± 10.98, and 67.33 ± 12.31 points in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively (F = 18.68, P < 0.001). The rates of excellent and good CM scores were 86.67%, 80.77%, 65.52%, and 43.14% in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively (χ2= 29.25, P < 0.001). The median (IQR) VAS scores were 1 (0–2), 1 (0–2), 2 (1–3), and 3 (1–5) points in the MCS, MMSS, MSSS, and NMS groups, respectively (H = 27.80, P < 0.001). Functional recovery was markedly better and VAS values were lower in the MCS and MMSS groups...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.