ISSN 0972-978X 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  About COAA
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SURGICAL REVIEW

Analysis Of Functional Outcome Of Proximal Humerus Fractures Treated By Closed Reduction And Percutaneous Fixation – A Prospective Study


*Dr. V.Vimal Kumar, Dr. Nitesh, Dr. M. Mohan Kumar, Prof. C. Subramanian

*Dept. of Orthopaedics, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and  Research       Institute (Deemed Institute), Chennai, India.
 

Address for Correspondence
Dr. V Vimal Kumar,
Dept. of Orthopaedics, Sri Ramachandra Medical College and  Research   Institute (Deemed Institute), Chennai, India.
 

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In dealing with displaced 2 part and 3 part proximal humerus fractures there is still much controversy in treatment modalities. This study emphasizes the concept of minimal invasive and stable fixation with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning as the treatment of choice.
Materials and Methods: The technique of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation were analyzed in 18 consecutive cases. The functional outcome was evaluated using Neer scoring system with a mean follow up of 10 months.
Results: 2 part fractures had 100% good outcome and 3 part fractures had 83% good results. The poor results in 3 part fractures were due to improper patient selection. Patients of age more than 60 years had poor results. Varus malunion did not affect the functional outcome unlike valgus malunion. No incidence of avascular necrosis in our series.
Conclusion: In this era of biological fixation, the method of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation yields satisfactory results in 2 part and 3 part proximal humerus fractures and can be a treatment of choice.

Key Words: Neers fracture, percutaneous fixation, biologic fixation.

J.Orthopaedics 2005;2(3)e3

Introduction

Fractures of the proximal humerus are challenging to diagnose and treat. Proximal humerus fractures are not uncommon, comprising to about 4 to 5 percentage of all fractures (Habermeyer and Schweiberer 1989).

Neer was among the first to recognize the deficiency of traditional methods in classification as well as standardization of treatment policy. He proposed two, three and four part fractures and fracture dislocation based on the observation first made by Codman in 1934 (Neer). Emphasis is placed on formulation of safe and simple technique for restoration of anatomy, stability, fracture healing, cuff integrity, motion and function.

Based on the Neer’s work, hemiarthroplasty has become widely accepted for the management of severely comminuted and grossly displaced fractures of the proximal humerus. However the optimal treatment in displaced two and three part lesion has remained a matter of controversy. Non surgical treatment of these fractures often results in severe malunion and poor functional outcome. Traditional open reduction may lead to more accurate reduction but the extensive tissue dissection doubles the risk of avascular necrosis and fracture disease.

Percutaneous reduction and fixation of such fractures would therefore seem to be desirable since this has (Resch et al, 1997) Minimal fixation, Maintains cuff integrity, Minimal scar / No scar, Maximizes anatomical restoration, Fracture hematoma undisturbed, Enhances fracture healing, Early post operative rehabilitation, Prevents avascular necrosis, Biological fixation, Easy implant removal.

 

Patients and method

From December 2002 to October 2004, consecutive patients with proximal humerus fractures were evaluated. We had 18 patients with proximal humerus fractures treated with closed reduction and percutaneous fixation for our functional outcome analysis.

There were 12 male (66%) and 6 female (34%) patients.

The average age was 45 years (Range 27 – 65 yrs).

After the injury, once the patients general condition became stabilized, routine radiographs of the injured shoulder were taken and the characteristics of the fracture were evaluated.

2 patients (11%) had anatomical neck fracture, 14 patients (78%) had surgical neck fracture, 14 patients (78%) had greater tuberosity fracture and one patient (5%) had lesser tuberosity fracture.

The fracture pattern, amount of displacement, communition and bone quality were assessed with anteroposterior view and dislocation, tuberosity displacement and articular surface defects were assessed in axial views. If needed CT scan was performed in selected patients to assess fracture pattern. The fractures were classified according to the criteria of Neer (Table 1).

 

Neer Classification

Number of patients

2 part

6

3 part

11

4 part

1

 

Fracture dislocation and head splitting fractures were excluded from the study. Those fractures which were identified as having unstable pattern, that could be satisfactorily reduced by manipulation with the patient in anesthesia but not stable, underwent percutaneous fixation with either Kirchner wires, schanz screws or cancellous screw .

15 of our patients (83%) had fixation with Kirchner wires (smooth K wires – 13 and threaded K wires – 2). Threaded K wires were used in patients with significant osteoporosis. 2 patients (11%) had schanz screw for 3 part fracture and 1 patient (5%) had cancellous screw fixation for 2 part fracture

The prerequisites for percutaneous fixation were that patients who had minimal communition at fracture site, good bone quality, could tolerate general anesthesia and there was no or minimal skin compromise of the injured shoulder. Patients who had a minimum follow up for 5 months were only included in our study. The average follow up was 10 months ranging from 5 months to 22 months. Patients who had conservative treatment, open fractures and open reduction were also excluded.

 

OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE

Reduction Maneuver
Closed reduction was performed under the guide of a C arm image intensifier. Special care was taken concerning posterior sagging of the humeral shaft caused by gravity. According to the study by Keene et al of 25 control patients in 1983, we defined eligibility criteria of “acceptable reduction” with regard to (1) neck-shaft angle on anteroposterior view of shoulder radiograph and (2) posterior angulation on lateral view.

Pinning Technique
Stabilization of head shaft fragments was started with K-pins inserted from lateral sides, anterior and greater tuberosity. Internal fixation of the humeral head fragment to the shaft was done with 2 lateral distal to proximal pins. Following this fixation, the shoulder was externally rotated by 20 to 30 degrees during placement of greater tuberosity pins to move the axillary nerve and the posterior humeral circumflex artery farther away from the humeral neck.

Schanz screws are also inserted in the same way as described above but instead of K wires, 2.5 mm schanz screws were used.

In cases of isolated greater tuberosity fractures, once reduction was achieved and held by K wire, partially threaded 4.5 mm cancellous screw without washer was inserted to maintain reduction and the temporary K wire was removed.

Postoperative Care
Passive and pendulum exercises were initiated as soon as pain and swelling subsided and the wound started to heal averaging 4 weeks, ranging from 1 week to 10 weeks. Immediate post operative radiographs and follow up radiographs were taken at 4 weeks to 6 weeks interval. The k-pins were removed when there is radiological evidence of union at 4 to 10 weeks, averaging 5 weeks. More aggressive motion and rotation exercises were then instituted to regain the range of motion of the shoulder.

The treatment results were assessed according to the grading scale of Neer at the maximum follow up of the patient (Table 2).

Parameters

Points Given

Pain

35

Function

30

Range Of Motion

25

Anatomy

10

Total

100

Neer system allows a total of 35 points for pain, 30 points for function, 25 points for motion and 10 points for reconstruction of anatomy with a maximum of 100 possible points. Pain, the most important consideration to the patient, is assigned 35 units. Functional range, more important in the shoulder than in most other joints, is accorded a greater unit value than strength and anatomy. To grade anatomy, the radiographs were evaluated with special regard to placement of pins, maintenance of reduction, implant migration, joint penetration, malunion, neck shaft angle, lateral angulation, nonunion, myositis, metal failure and avascular necrosis of the humeral head. More than 89 points constitutes an excellent result; 80 to 89 points, a good result; 70 to 79 points, a fair result; fewer than 70 points, a poor result (Neer 1970).

Results

RANGE OF MOVEMENT

The average and available range of movement as recorded with goniometer (Table 3).

 

 

                                           In Degrees

Neer

Abduct

F.Flex

Int.Rot

Exten

Ext.Rot

Adduct

2 Part

170

163

70

60

100

37

55 – 180

110 – 180

MAX

1 PT HAD 30

0 – 100

20 – 45

3 Part

161

160

70

45

87

37

20 – 170

30 – 170

MAX

10 – 60

0 – 100

0 – 45

4 Part

5

5

20

10

0

5

 

The average restriction of movement as noted (Table 4).

 

 

2 part

3 part

4 part

Abduction

10

20

175

Adduction

8

8

40

Extension

Nil

Nil

50

Forward flexion

17

20

175

Internal rotation

Nil

Nil

50

External rotation

Nil

13

-10

 

10 degrees loss of abduction for 2 part and 20 degrees for 3 part fractures

17 degrees loss of forward flexion in 2 part and 20 degrees loss in 3 part fractures.

The maximum attainable abduction and forward flexion in 3 part is 170 degrees.

Extension is unaffected in 2 part and loss of 15 degrees in 3 part fractures.

Internal rotation is unaffected in both 2 and 3 part fractures.

13 degrees loss of external rotation for both 2 and 3 part fractures.

8 degrees loss of adduction for both 2 and 3 part fractures.

The four part patient had deep infection and the movements are grossly restricted.

 

 

NEER’s SCORING

 

 

Excellent

Good

Fair

Poor

Total

2 Part

4

2

-

-

6

3 Part

4

5

1

1

11

4 Part

-

-

-

1

1

Total

8

7

1

2

18

 

            According to Neer’s functional outcome scoring 15 patients (83%) had excellent/Good result and remaining 3 patients (17%) had fair/poor results (Table 5).

On analyzing our functional outcome result with the age, it was noticed that patients with age more than 60 years had poor outcome irrespective of fracture classification (Table 6).

 

 

AGE IN YEARS

21 – 30

31 – 40

41 – 50

51 – 60

61 – 70

Patients

2

7

4

1

4

Pain             (35)

30

31

29

30

29

Function     (30)

29

28

25

14

21

Rom            (25)

25

22

16

7

16

Anatomy     (10)

9

8

9

8

6

Neers Average

92

92

78

84

72

 

COMPLICATIONS

Union
Two patients had non union of greater tuberosity. Malunion of the greater tuberosity occurred in 1 patient leading to limitation of abduction to 60 degrees.

Malunion in the coronal plane (more than 160 degrees  or less than 130 degrees) was observed in 8 patients (44%).

Of the 8 patients who had malunion in coronal plane, 3 patients (10%) had malunion with less than 130 degrees angulation (Range 90 to 130 degrees) and all had excellent/good outcome. But out of the remaining 5 patients who had malunion more than 160 degrees (Range 160 to 190) 3 patients (60%) had fair/poor result (Table 7).

 

Degrees

Patients

Excellent/good

Fair/poor

<130

3

3

Nil

>160

5

2

3

 

Infection
No 2 part fracture patients had infection

Two patients (11%) of 3 part fracture had mild superficial pin track infection. The superficial infection resolved with removal of pin and local care.

Deep infection developed in one patient who had 4 part fracture and it required multiple debridments.

 

Hardware Complications
3 patients (17%) had unsatisfactory fixation of the fracture.

2 patients (11%) had joint penetration and it did not affect functional outcome.

1 patient (5%) had k wire migration.

In one patient tip of the pin broke during the attempt of pinning.

 

Others
No myositis ossificans

No Avascular necrosis

No re reduction or secondary procedure

No axillary nerve injury postoperatively

 

Discussion

There has been great controversy about management of complex fractures of the proximal humerus. Many articles dealing with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus present varied options based on the classification of Neer. Despite lack of interobserver and intraobserver reliability as criticized by many authors, Neer’s classification bears the comprehensive advantage of prognostic implication and remains the standard. According to the recommendation of Neer, operative approaches with minimal dissection and rigid fixation have been emphasized with the objective of preservation of vascularity to the articular fragment. The method of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation bears the inherent advantage of minimizing tissue destruction that, hence, preserves vascularity to the humeral head and facilitates early tissue healing.

Other investigators have suggested that open reduction with limited dissection and minimal fixation may reduce the prevalence of avascular necrosis. However, minimal exposure can seldom be achieved without the expense of insufficient fixation that may hinder the initiation of early rehabilitation.

We compared our study with Roland et al’s study on internal fixation for 2 and 3 part fractures and found we had superior results (Table 8).

 

 

Our study, 2004

(closed reduction and percutaneous fixation)

Roland

Jakob et al, 1991

(open reduction)

Number of patients

17

18

Mean age in years

45

49.5

Average Neer score

89

81

Excellent/good

83%

74%

Also we compared our results with various published results of nonoperative methods and again we had better results except our 4 part fracture (Table 9).

 

 

Our study,

2004

Svend et al,

1974

Rezemon Baux et al,1965

Baudin et al,

1977

2 part

Ex/G

6

100%

 

 

 

3 part

Ex/G

11

81%

22

50%

26

77%

8

75%

4 part

Ex/G

1

0%

15

33%

6

67%

7

71%

 

However, it is advisable to identify the actual fracture type, age and bone quality, which fulfills the criteria for percutaneous fixation.

The method of closed management for displaced proximal humerus fractures was proposed in 1984. Results have been improving because various kinds of fixation techniques continue to evolve.

In our series all the patients with 2 part fractures had good outcome. The poor outcome in 2 patients with 3 part fractures were because, they were aged more than 60 yrs and one patient had inadequate fixation and nonunion of greater tuberosity.

Patients of older age group, more than 60 years, had poor outcome probably because of poor bone quality and lack of motivation. Also, our patients with age more than 60 years had nearly the same result as Court brown et al’s non operative treatment.

The common technical error were few pins were used, pins were placed close in head and pins placed through fracture. These can be avoided with careful assessment of fracture preoperatively and orientation to image intensifier intraoperatively.

Nonunion can occur due to many reasons namely loss of blood supply to the fractured fragment, interposition of soft tissues, inadequate holding power of pins in elderly osteoporotic bone or early mobilization in the absence of adequate fixation.

Comparing our study with Chao Yu Chen et al’s study of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation, both had 83% good results even though our average followup was only 10 months when compared to Chao’s average of 21 months (Table 10).

 

 

Our study, 2004

Chao et al, 1998

Duration

Jan 2002 to Aug 2004

Jul 1995 to Aug 1996

Total number of patients

18

19

M : F

12 : 6

12 : 7

Average age

45 years

43 years

Average follow up

10 months

21 months

Excellent/Good results

83%

84%

Average neck shaft angle

156 degrees

141 degrees

Pin Migration

1 patient

2 patients

Average union

8 weeks

10 weeks

Pin tract infection

3 patients

Nil

Pin breakage

1 patient

Nil

Avascular necrosis

Nil

Nil

 

Closed reduction and percutaneous reduction makes sense from the standpoint of retention of vascularity, provided done in selected cases of 2 and 3 part fractures with adequate reduction (neck shaft angle <160) and stable fixation. By this, the dreadful complication like avascular necrosis is avoided and also less period of immobilization with faster healing rate. This makes this technique of closed reduction and percutaneous fixation a reasonable alternative to conservative and open reduction methods, perhaps can be the treatment of choice.

Conclusions 

In our series, 83% of the patients who had proximal humerus fractures had excellent and good functional outcome graded according to the criteria of Neer, after closed reduction and percutaneous pinning.

2 part fracture yields good results when treated by this procedure.

The 19% fair/poor result in 3 part fractures were due to improper patient selection.

Functional outcome was poor for patients more than 60 years and this should be considered in patient selection with communition and bone quality.

Residual varus angulation in any fracture did not affect functional outcome.

Residual valgus angulation (>160 degrees) has deterious effect on functional  outcome.

There is always mild restriction of abduction and forward flexion in 3 part fractures without affecting the functional outcome.

Though technically demanding, with indirect reduction and adequate fixation, the results are good (83%).

In this era of biological osteosynthesis, closed reduction and percutaneous pinning can be the treatment of choice for 2 part and 3 part fractures.

 

References

1) Gerald.R.Williams, Jr,MD, and Kirk.L.Wong,MD;Two part and three part fractures: Open reduction and internal fixation vs Percutaneous pinning; OCNA ;Volume 31; Number 1; January 2000; Page number 1 to 21.
2) Chao-Yu chen, MD; Closed management and percutaneous fixation of unstable proximal humerus fractures; Journal of Trauma; Vol. 45; No. 6; Page no 1039 – 1045.
3) Hans Jaberg, MD; Percutaneous stabilization of unstable fractures of the humerus; JBJS ; volume 74-A, Page 505 – 515.
4) Robert Resch, Paul povacz; Percutaneous fixation of three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus; JBJS; 1997; 79-B; 295 – 300.
5) A.J.Wijgman,MD; Open reduction and internal fixation of three and four part fractures of the proximal part of the humerus; JBJS; Volume 84- A; Number 11; Nov 2002; Page 1919 – 1925.
6) C.M. Court-Brown, H. Cattermole, M.M. McQueen; Impacted valgus fractures (B1.1) of the proximal humerus; JBJS; 2002; 84-B; 504-508.
7) Douglas D. Robertson, MD, Ph.D, Three dimensional analysis of the proximal part of the humerus: Relavance to arthroplasty; JBJS; 82-A; Number 11; November 2000; Page 1594 – 1600.
8) Karol Zyto, Leif Ahrengart; Treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients; JBJS; 1997; 79-B;Page 412-417.
9) Michael Watson; Bipolar salvage shoulder arthroplasty; JBJS; 78-B; Number 1; January 1996; 124 – 128.
10) Michael L.Sidor,MD, Joseph. D. Zuckermann MD; The Neer classification system for proximal humerus fractures; JBJS; 75-A, Number 12; December 1993; Page 1745 – 1750.
11) C.M.Robinson and J. Christie; The two part proximal humeral fracture: A review of operative treatment using two techniques; Journal of Injury;1993; 24(2); 123-125.
12) Roland P.Jakob, Anthony Miniaci; Four part valgus impacted fractures of the proximal humerus; JBJS vol 73-B; No.2; March 1991, 295-8.
13) Joseph Bernstein MD; Evaluation of the Neer system of classification of proximal humeral fractures with computerized tomographic scans and plain radiographs; JBJS Volume 78-A; Number 9; September 1996; Page 1371 – 1375.
14) Douglas. J. Rowles MD; James E. McGrory MD; Percutaneous pinning of the proximal part of the humerus- An anatomic study; JBJS; Volume 83-A; Number 11; November 2001; 1695 – 1699.
15) John E. Kuhn,MD and Ralph B.Blasier MD, OCNA, Volume 29, Number 3, July 1998, page 549-563.
16) Lagdon A. Hartsock,MD; Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures; OCNA; Volume 29; Number 3; July 1998; Page 467 – 475.
17) Keeneth J. Koval MD; Surgical neck fractures of the proximal humerus: A laboratory evaluation of ten fixation techniques; Journal of Trauma; Volume 40; No 5; May 1996; Page 778 – 783.
18) Helen J. Mills and Geoffrey Horne; Fractures of the proximal humerus in adults; Journal of Trauma; Volume 25; No 8; August 1985; 801- 805.
19) C.R.Constant and A.H.G. Murley; A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder; CORR; Volume 214; Page 160 – 164.
20) Charles Neer, New york; Displaced proximal humerus fractures Part I : classification and Evaluation; JBJS; Volume 52-A; Number 6; Page 1077-1089.
21) Charles Neer, New york; Displaced proximal humerus fractures Part II : Treatment of three part and four part displacement; JBJS; Volume 52-A; Number 6; Page 1090-1095.
22)
S.K.Moda, N.S. Chadha; Open reduction and fixation of proximal humeral fractures and facture – dislocations; JBJS;1990; 72-B; Page 1050 -1052.
23)
Evan L. Flatow, MD; Open reduction and internal fixation of two-part displaced fractures of the greater tuberosity of the proximal part of the humerus; JBJS; September 1991; Page 1213 – 1218

 

 

 This is a peer reviewed paper 

Please cite as :

Vimal Kumar V:Analysis Of Functional Outcome Of Proximal Humerus Fractures Treated By Closed Reduction And Percutaneous Fixation – A Prospective Study


J.Orthopaedics 2005;2(3)e3

URL: http://www.jortho.org/2005/2/1/e2

ANNOUNCEMENTS

 


 

Arthrocon 2014


INTERNATIONAL KNEE SYMPOSIUM Additional CME of KOA

13th Summer Meet,16th March,2014

At Malabar Palace,
Calicut, Kerala, India

Download Registration Form

For Details
Dr Anwar Marthya,
Ph:+91 9961303044

E-Mail:
anwarmh@gmail.com

 

Powered by
VirtualMedOnline

 

 

   
© Copyright of articles belongs to the respective authors unless otherwise specified.Verbatim copying, redistribution and storage of this article permitted provided no restrictions are imposed on the access and a hyperlink to the original article in Journal of Orthopaedics maintained. All opinion stated are exclusively that of the author(s).
Journal of Orthopaedics upholds the policy of Open Access to Scientific literature.