The results of clinical trial with polylactide implants for osteosynthesis of proximal humerus fractures in patients with osteoporosis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872019426-36

Keywords:

multifragments proximal humerus fracture, PHILOS plate, polylactide implant, osteoporosis

Abstract

Proximal humerus fractures (AO/OTA 11) occur in 5–6 % of the trauma structure and most often are in people older than 50 years. There is no currently existing universally accepted approach to the treatment of proximal humerus fractures with osteoporosis. Objective: to analyze the results of surgical treatment of patients with multifragments proximal humerus fractures and osteoporosis using PHILOS type plate and polylactide implants. Methods: 38 women with osteoporosis were made surgeries with PHILOS and polylactide implants; their age was from 54 to 78 years, at the period 2015–2019. 32 patients had three-fragment proximal humerus fracture by Neer (AO/OTA 11-B), 6 — four-fragment (AO/OTA 11-C). The results were evaluated by Constant-Murley Shoulder Score in 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery. Results: there was fracture healing in all patients. We did not observe any avascular head necrosis. The average score by Constant-Murley Shoulder Score after 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery was equal to 78.2; 82.1; 87.2 and 87.2 points, respectively. One patient had a perforation by screw; two patients had a superficial infection that was eliminated with antibacterial therapy. There was a secondary displacement of small tubercle of the humeral head up to 8–10 mm in one patient after 3 months without any harm to shoulder joint function. Conclusions. PHILOS plates with reinforcement of polylactide implants allowed to achieve 89.5 % positive results in the period from 6 to 24 months after the surgery in patients with multifragments proximal humerus fractures and osteoporosis. There is low level of complications comparing with other available methods (mean score for Constant-Murley Shoulder Score 87.2).

Author Biographies

Mykola Korzh

Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

MD, Prof. in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

Vasyl Makarov

SE «Specialized Multidisciplinary Hospital № 1 of the Ministry of Health of Ukraine», Dnipro

PhD in Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Оleksiy Tankut

Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

PhD in Traumatology and Orthopаedics

Olga Pidgaiska

Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

PhD in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

References

  1. Meinberg, E., Agel, J., Roberts, C., Karam, M., & Kellam, J. (2018). Fracture and Dislocation Classification Compendium –2018. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 32, S1–S10. doi:10.1097/bot.0000000000001063
  2. Kannus, P., Palvanen, M., Niemi, S., Sievänen, H., & Parkkari, J. (2009). Rate of proximal humeral fractures in older Finnish women between 1970 and 2007. Bone, 44 (4), 656–659. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2008.12.007
  3. Palvanen, M., Kannus, P., Niemi, S., & Parkkari, J. (2006). Update in the Epidemiology of Proximal Humeral Fractures. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 442 (&NA;), 87–92. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000194672.79634.78
  4. Kim, S. H., Szabo, R. M., & Marder, R. A. (2012). Epidemiology of humerus fractures in the United States: nationwide emergency department sample, 2008. Arthritis Care & Research, 64 (3), 407–414. doi: 10.1002/acr.21563
  5. Launonen, A. P., Lepola, V., Flinkkilä, T., Strandberg, N., Ojanperä, J., Rissanen, P. & Laitinen, M. (2012). Conservative treatment, plate fixation, or prosthesis for proximal humeral fracture. A prospective randomized study. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 13(1). doi:10.1186/1471-2474-13-167
  6. Ring, D. (2007). Current concepts in plate and screw fixation of osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures. Injury, 38 (3), 59–68. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2007.08.013
  7. Fjalestad, T., & Hole, M. Ø. (2014). Displaced proximal humeral fractures: operative versus non-operative treatment – a 2-year extension of a randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology, 24 (7), 1067–1073. doi:10.1007/s00590-013-1403-y
  8. Bahrs, C., Tanja, S., Gunnar, B., Stig, B., Badke, A., Ulrich, S., … Thomas, F. (2014). Trends in epidemiology and patho-anatomical pattern of proximal humeral fractures. International Orthopaedics, 38 (8), 1697–1704. doi: 10.1007/s00264-014-2362-6
  9. Maier, D., Jаger, M., Strohm, P. C. & Sudkamp, N. P. (2012). Treatment of proximal humeral fractures — a review of current concepts enlightened by basic principles. Acta Chirurgiae Orthopaedicae et Traumatologiae Cechoslovaca, 79 (4), 307–316
  10. Murray, I. R., Amin, A. K., White, T. O. & Robinson, C. M. (2011). Proximal humeral fractures. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 93-B (1), 1–11. doi:10.1302/0301-620x.93b1.25702
  11. Resch, H. (2011). Proximal humeral fractures: current controversies. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 20 (5), 827–832. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.009
  12. Iyengar, J. J., Devcic, Z., Sproul, R. C. & Feeley, B. T. (2011). Nonoperative treatment of proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 25 (10), 612–617. doi: 10.1097/bot.0b013e3182008df8
  13. Poeze, M., Lenssen, A. F., Van Empel, J. M., & Verbruggen, J. P. (2010). Conservative management of proximal humeral fractures: Can poor functional outcome be related to standard transscapular radiographic evaluation? Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 19 (2), 273–281. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.07.066
  14. Sproul, R. C., Iyengar, J. J., Devcic, Z., & Feeley, B. T. (2011). A systematic review of locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures. Injury, 42 (4), 408–413. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.058
  15. Jost, B., Spross, C., Grehn, H., & Gerber, C. (2013). Locking plate fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus: analysis of complications, revision strategies and outcome. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 22 (4), 542–549. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.06.008
  16. Thanasas, C., Kontakis, G., Angoules, A., Limb, D., & Giannoudis, P. (2009). Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with locking plates: A systematic review. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 18 (6), 837–844. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.06.004
  17. Chalmers, P. N., Slikker, W., Mall, N. A., Gupta, A. K., Rahman, Z., Enriquez, D., & Nicholson, G. P. (2014). Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fracture: comparison to open reduction–internal fixation and hemiarthroplasty. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 23 (2), 197–204. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.07.044
  18. Acevedo, D. C., VanBeek, C., Lazarus, M. D., Williams, G. R., & Abboud, J. A. (2014). Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures: update on indications, technique, and results. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 23 (2), 279–289. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.10.003
  19. Gerber, C., Hersche, O., & Berberat, C. (1998). The clinical relevance of posttraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 7 (6), 586–590. doi:10.1016/s1058-2746(98)90005-2
  20. Gupta, A. K., Harris, J. D., Erickson, B. J., Abrams, G. D., Bruce, B., McCormick, F., & Romeo, A. A. (2015). Surgical management of complex proximal humerus fractures – a systematic review of 92 studies including 4500 patients. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 29 (1), 54–59. doi: 10.1097/bot.0000000000000229
  21. Neviaser, A. S., Hettrich, C. M., Dines, J. S., & Lorich, D. G. (2011). Rate of avascular necrosis following proximal humerus fractures treated with a lateral locking plate and endosteal implant. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 131 (12), 1617–1622. doi:10.1007/s00402-011-1366-6
  22. Katthagen, J. C., Schwarze, M., Meyer-Kobbe, J., Voigt, C., Hurschler, C., & Lill, H. (2014). Biomechanical effects of calcar screws and bone block augmentation on medial support in locked plating of proximal humeral fractures. Clinical Biomechanics, 29 (7), 735–741. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2014.06.008
  23. Röderer, G., Scola, A., Schmölz, W., Gebhard, F., Windolf, M., & Hofmann-Fliri, L. (2013). Biomechanical in vitro assessment of screw augmentation in locked plating of proximal humerus fractures. Injury, 44 (10), 1327–1332. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.05.008
  24. Kathrein, S., Kralinger, F., Blauth, M., & Schmoelz, W. (2013). Biomechanical comparison of an angular stable plate with augmented and non-augmented screws in a newly developed shoulder test bench. Clinical Biomechanics, 28 (3), 273–277. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2012.12.013
  25. Osterhoff, G., Baumgartner, D., Favre, P., Wanner, G. A., Gerber, H., Simmen, H., & Werner, C. M. (2011). Medial support by fibula bone graft in angular stable plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures: an in vitro study with synthetic bone. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 20 (5), 740–746. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.10.040
  26. Mathison, C., Chaudhary, R., Beaupre, L., Reynolds, M., Adeeb, S., & Bouliane, M. (2010). Biomechanical analysis of proximal humeral fixation using locking plate fixation with an intramedullary fibular allograft. Clinical Biomechanics, 25 (7), 642–646. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.04.006
  27. Chow, R. M., Begum, F., Beaupre, L. A., Carey, J. P., Adeeb, S., & Bouliane, M. J. (2012). Proximal humeral fracture fixation: locking plate construct ± intramedullary fibular allograft. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 21 (7), 894–901. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.04.015
  28. Tyazhelov, O. A., Klimovitsky, V. G., Karpinsky, M. Yu., Subbota, I. A., Goncharova, L. D., & Hardi Vadid (2009) The method of surgical treatment of metaphyseal and metaphysical fractures of long bones. Patent No. 46958 UA.
  29. Klimovitsky, V. G., Hadri Vadid, Goncharova, L. D., Gurin, I. V., І.В.Гурін, Tyazhelov, O. A., Karpinsky, M. Yu., & Subbota, I. A. (2010). Justification of the use of new implant material for fixation of metaphyseal fractures. Trauma, 11 (1), 27–30. [in Ukrainian]
  30. Klimovitsky, V. G., Tyazhelov, O. A., & Hadri Vadid (2011). Development of a model of combined osteosynthesis of metaphyseal fractures using carbon implants. Trauma, 12 (1), 35–38. [in Ukrainian]
  31. Dedukh, N. V., Nikolchenko, O. A., & Makarov V. B. (2018). Restructuring of bone around polylactide acid implanted into defect of diaphysis. Bulletin of problems biology and medicine, 1 (142), 275–279. doi: 10.29254/2077-4214-2018-1-1-142-275-279 [in Ukrainian]
  32. Makarov, Vasyl, Lipovskiy, Volodymyr, Levadniy, Yevgen, Boyko, Igor, & Lazarenko, Gleb (2018). Experimental study of stiffness fixation of a three-part fracture of the proximal humerus. Ortopaedics, Traumatology and Prosthetics, 4 (613), 115–121. doi: 10.15674/0030- 598720184115-121. (in Ukrainian)
  33. Ilija Ban1, Anders Troelsen1, David Høyrup Christiansen, Susanne Wulff Svendsen & Morten Tange Kristensen (2013). Standardized test protocol (Constant Score) for evaluation of functionality in patients with shoulder disorders. Danish Medical Journal, 60 (4), A4608.
  34. Tingart, M. J., Apreleva, M., Von Stechow, D., Zurakowski, D., & Warner, J. J. (2003). The cortical thickness of the proximal humeral diaphysis predicts bone mineral density of the proximal humerus. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 85-B (4), 611–617. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.85b4.12843
  35. Den Teuling, J., Pauwels, B., Janssen, L., Wyers, C., Janzing, H. M., Van den Bergh, J., & Morrenhof, J. W. (2017). The influence of bone mineral density and cortical index on the complexity of fractures of the proximal humerus. Bone & Joint Research, 6 (10), 584–589. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.610.bjr-2017-0080
  36. Osterhoff, G., Diederichs, G., Tami, A., Theopold, J., Josten, C., & Hepp, P. (2011). Influence of trabecular microstructure and cortical index on the complexity of proximal humeral fractures. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 132 (4), 509–515. doi:10.1007/s00402-011-1446-7
  37. Solberg, B. D., Moon, C. N., Franco, D. P., & Paiement, G. D. (2009). Locked plating of 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures in older patients: the effect of initial fracture pattern on outcome. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 23 (2), 113–119. doi:10.1097/bot.0b013e31819344bf
  38. Hardeman, F., Bollars, P., Donnelly, M., Bellemans, J., & Nijs, S. (2012). Predictive factors for functional outcome and failure in angular stable osteosynthesis of the proximal humerus. Injury, 43 (2), 153–158. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.04.003
  39. Little, M. T., Berkes, M. B., Schottel, P. C., Lazaro, L. E., LaMont, L. E., Pardee, N. C., … Lorich, D. G. (2014). The impact of preoperative coronal plane deformity on proximal humerus fixation with endosteal augmentation. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 28 (6), 338–347. doi: 10.1097/bot.0000000000000012
  40. Matassi, F., Angeloni, R., Carulli, C., Civinini, R., Di Bella, L., Redl, B., & Innocenti, M. (2012). Locking plate and fibular allograft augmentation in unstable fractures of proximal humerus. Injury, 43 (11), 1939–1942. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2012.08.004
  41. Tan, E., Lie, D., & Wong, M. K. (2014). Early outcomes of proximal humerus fracture fixation with locking plate and intramedullary fibular strut graft. Orthopedics, 37 (9), e822–e827. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20140825-60
  42. Neviaser, A. S., Hettrich, C. M., Beamer, B. S., Dines, J. S., & Lorich, D. G. (2011). Endosteal strut augment reduces complications associated with proximal humeral locking plates. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®, 469 (12), 3300–3306. doi:10.1007/s11999-011-1949-0
  43. Blazejak, M., Hofmann-Fliri, L., Büchler, L., Gueorguiev, B., & Windolf, M. (2013). In vitro temperature evaluation during cement augmentation of proximal humerus plate screw tips. Injury, 44 (10), 1321–1326. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2013.04.028
  44. Schliemann, B., Wähnert, D., Theisen, C., Herbort, M., Kösters, C., Raschke, M. J., & Weimann, A. (2015). How to enhance the stability of locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures? An overview of current biomechanical and clinical data. Injury, 46 (7), 1207–1214. doi:10.1016/j.injury.2015.04.020
  45. Makarov, V. B., Dedukh, N. V., & Nikolchenko, O. A. (2018). Osteoreparation around the polylactide, implanted into the metadiaphys defect of the femur (experimental study). Orthopedics, Traumatology and Prosthetics, 2, 102–107. doi: 10.15674/0030-598720182102-107 (in Russian)
  46. Lescheid, J., Zdero, R., Shah, S., Kuzyk, P. R., & Schemitsch, E. H. (2010). The biomechanics of locked plating for repairing proximal humerus fractures with or without medial cortical support. The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 69 (5), 1235–1242. doi: 10.1097/ta.0b013e3181beed96
  47. Sebastiá-Forcada, E., Cebrián-Gómez, R., Lizaur-Utrilla, A., & Gil-Guillén, V. (2014). Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures. A blinded, randomized, controlled, prospective study. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 23 (10), 1419–1426. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.06.035

Downloads

How to Cite

Korzh, M., Makarov, V., Tankut О., & Pidgaiska, O. (2020). The results of clinical trial with polylactide implants for osteosynthesis of proximal humerus fractures in patients with osteoporosis. ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY and PROSTHETICS, (4), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872019426-36

Issue

No. 4 (2019)

Section

ORIGINAL ARTICLES

License

Copyright (c) 2020 Mykola Korzh, Vasyl Makarov, Оleksiy Tankut, Olga Pidgaiska

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The authors retain the right of authorship of their manuscript and pass the journal the right of the first publication of this article, which automatically become available from the date of publication under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published manuscript with mandatory linking to authors of the original research and the first publication of this one in this journal.

Authors have the right to enter into a separate supplemental agreement on the additional non-exclusive distribution of manuscript in the form in which it was published by the journal (i.e. to put work in electronic storage of an institution or publish as a part of the book) while maintaining the reference to the first publication of the manuscript in this journal.

The editorial policy of the journal allows authors and encourages manuscript accommodation online (i.e. in storage of an institution or on the personal websites) as before submission of the manuscript to the editorial office, and during its editorial processing because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of the published manuscript citation (see The Effect of Open Access).