Proximal humerus simple twopart fracture Case for small

  • Slides: 22
Download presentation
Proximal humerus: simple twopart fracture Case for small group discussion: Upper extremity fractures—decision making

Proximal humerus: simple twopart fracture Case for small group discussion: Upper extremity fractures—decision making and methods of stabilization AO Trauma Advanced Principles Course

Case history • 52 -year-old male patient • Trauma mechanism: – The patient did

Case history • 52 -year-old male patient • Trauma mechanism: – The patient did fall from an about 2 -meter height (stairs) with a direct impact on the left shoulder – He cannot move the shoulder and is in severe pain – The skin is intact, we note bruising over the deltoid area and the left hemithorax – There are no neurovascular disturbances, especially not concerning the axillary – There is no clinical indication of other traumatic injuries Day 0

Case history • Medical history: – 06/2007: large cell bladder carcinoma with important post-renal

Case history • Medical history: – 06/2007: large cell bladder carcinoma with important post-renal failure – 01/2008: cystectomy with orthotopic bladder replacement – 10/2009: radial head fracture on right elbow – 10/2009: scaphoid fracture left wrist Day 0

X-ray Day 0

X-ray Day 0

X-ray Day 0

X-ray Day 0

Classification

Classification

Classification • Is there a fracture between the head and the greater tuberosity? •

Classification • Is there a fracture between the head and the greater tuberosity? • Is there a fracture between the head and the lesser tuberosity? • Is there a fracture between the greater tuberosity and the shaft? • Is there a fracture between the lesser tuberosity and the shaft? HGL-S

Classification • Distraction Varus

Classification • Distraction Varus

Classification Posterior tilt

Classification Posterior tilt

Defects?

Defects?

Osteoporosis? + 52 -year-old man - Oncological history

Osteoporosis? + 52 -year-old man - Oncological history

Patient and injury-related considerations • Functional demands: high – young active man • Comorbidities:

Patient and injury-related considerations • Functional demands: high – young active man • Comorbidities: ASA 2 – (oncological history: no active diseases) • Vascularization of the head: HGL-S type – (good prognosis) • Rotator cuff: no history of shoulder complaints and young patient – Likely to be intact

Treatment options • Nonoperative treatment • Fixation: – Closed nailing – Minimally invasive percutaneous

Treatment options • Nonoperative treatment • Fixation: – Closed nailing – Minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) – Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF)

Risk factors for failure after ORIF 1. Age 2. Osteoporosis 3. Nonanatomic reduction 4.

Risk factors for failure after ORIF 1. Age 2. Osteoporosis 3. Nonanatomic reduction 4. Loss of posteromedial support Krappinger et al (Injury. 2011; 42: 1283– 1288)

Treatment choice • Intramedullary nailing: – Minimally invasive – Closed reduction – Biomechanically superior

Treatment choice • Intramedullary nailing: – Minimally invasive – Closed reduction – Biomechanically superior stability in case of medial defect

Technique Extend the shoulder

Technique Extend the shoulder

Technique

Technique

Technique

Technique

Technique

Technique

Follow-up X-rays Week 6

Follow-up X-rays Week 6

Follow-up X-rays Week 52

Follow-up X-rays Week 52

Take-home messages • Evaluate H-G-L-S and displacement (varus/valgus and posterior tilt). • Evaluate defects

Take-home messages • Evaluate H-G-L-S and displacement (varus/valgus and posterior tilt). • Evaluate defects and osteoporosis. • Evaluate biological parameters (patient needs – comorbidities – vascularization head – rotator cuff). • Importance of anatomical reduction and reconstruction posteromedial support. • Exact operative technique, respecting the anatomical key-structures.