DOCSLIB.ORG

Distal Humerus Nonunion After Failed Internal Fixation: Reconstruction with Total Elbow Arthroplasty Dawn M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Distal Humerus Nonunion After Failed Internal Fixation: Reconstruction with Total Elbow Arthroplasty Dawn M (aspects of trauma • an original study) Distal Humerus Nonunion After Failed Internal Fixation: Reconstruction With Total Elbow Arthroplasty Dawn M. LaPorte, MD, Michael S. Murphy, MD, and J. Russell Moore, MD ABSTRACT onunion occurs in 2% ing treatment option. In the 1980s, In nonunion after distal humerus to 5% of distal humerus TEA for nonunion with tightly con- fracture, osteoporosis, devas- fractures.1 The condition strained or custom prostheses had cularized fracture fragments, is difficult to treat, and fair to moderately good results but and periarticular fibrosis limit Nno single treatment modality has a high complication rates (4/7, 57%6; potential reconstructive options. high success rate with few compli- 5/14, 36%10). According to a recent We assessed pain relief, func- 2-6 11 tional gains, and complications cations. Without intervention, the review, however, 31 (86%) of 36 in 12 patients whose long-stand- patient is left with a painful, unstable, patients had a satisfactory result with ing, painful nonunions after previ- and often flail extremity and with a semiconstrained prosthesis, and ous treatment with rigid internal limitations in activities of daily liv- only 7 (19%) of the 36 patients had fixation were reconstructed with ing. Frequently, there is an associ- complications. a semiconstrained total elbow ated ulnar neuropathy. Osteoporosis, In the current study, we assessed arthroplasty, frequently with a devascularized fracture fragments, outcomes (complications, symptoms, triceps-sparing approach and and periarticular fibrosis limit poten- function) after semiconstrained anterior ulnar nerve transposition. tial reconstructive options for long- TEA for long-standing distal humer- At mean follow-up of 63 months, 11 patients had good pain relief and standing distal humerus nonunions. us nonunions. a good or excellent functional result: Current treatment modalities for mean flexion/extension, 134° to 18°; distal humerus nonunion include brac- MATERIALS AND METHODS mean total arc of motion, 117°; mean ing and mobilization, open reduc- pronation/supination, 74° to 69°. tion and internal fixation with bone Patient Population Despite the 75% rate of compli- graft, resection arthroplasty, allograft, With the approval of the institution- cations (8), semiconstrained total arthrodesis, and total elbow arthro- al review board, we retrospectively elbow arthroplasty provides a viable plasty (TEA). Each has its disad- reviewed one institution’s patient data- treatment for this difficult problem. vantages. In 2 studies,2,6 secondary base to identify patients who, between osteosynthesis was associated with an 1989 and 1997, had been treated with Dr. LaPorte is Assistant Professor, unsatisfactory result more than 50% a semiconstrained TEA for painful, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The of the time; in a more recent study, 5 long-standing (>14 months) dis- Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, (71%) of 7 patients with nonunion had tal humerus fracture nonunion. We Maryland. Dr. Murphy is Assistant Professor, a good or excellent result with autolo- excluded patients with painless non- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The gous bone graft, stable fixation, and union, patients with nonunions treated Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, capsulectomy.5 Resection arthroplasty initially with arthroplasty, and patients Maryland, and Faculty, Curtis National Hand Center and The Greater Chesapeake leaves the patient with a flail extrem- treated with arthroplasty for an indica- Hand Specialists, Lutherville, Maryland. ity that may still require splinting. For tion other than nonunion. Dr. Moore is Faculty, Curtis National Hand some patients with substantial bone We identified 12 consecutive Center and The Greater Chesapeake Hand Specialists, Lutherville, Maryland. loss, osteoarticular allografts are a sal- patients who met the study crite- vage option, but the complication rate ria. All 12 distal humerus fractures Address correspondence to: Dawn M. (infection, instability, graft resorption) had been treated initially with rigid LaPorte, MD, c/o Elaine P. Henze, BJ, 7,8 ELS, Medical Editor, Department of is high, and results usually are poor. internal fixation. Mean age of the Orthopaedic Surgery, Johns Hopkins Elbow arthrodesis is technically dif- 4 male and 8 female patients at the Bayview Medical Center, 4940 Eastern ficult, has a high complication rate, time of arthroplasty was 61 years Ave, A672, Baltimore, MD 21224-2780 (tel, 410-550-5400; fax, 410-550-2899; e- and is associated with a low patient (range, 36-81 years), mean duration mail, [email protected]). satisfaction rate.9 of nonunion was 28 months (range, Because of such high complica- 14-96 months), and mean number of Am J Orthop. 2008;37(10):531-534. Copyright Quadrant HealthCom Inc. 2008. tion rates, prosthetic replacement of additional surgeries after the initial All rights reserved. the elbow provides a more appeal- intervention was 2 (range, 1–5). October 2008 531 Total Elbow Arthroplasty for Distal Humerus Nonunion Table. Patient Data Patient Age at Follow-Up Arc of Motion (°) Elbow Repeat No. Surgery (y) (mo) Flexion Extension Total Pronation Supination Score Complication Surgery 1 51 94 150 0 150 80 80 100 None No 2 36 83 130 –15 115 75 75 80 Ulnar neuropathy No 3 71 40 140 0 140 75 75 90 None No 4 59 64 130 –20 110 75 60 75 Olecranon fracture No 5 61 61 140 –10 130 76 75 90 Superficial infection No 6 63 56 130 –25 105 70 65 75 Triceps weakness No 7 62 43 120 –40 80 60 55 57 Deep infection No 8 59 86 145 –10 135 78 80 90 None No 9 62 70 133 –18 115 75 70 80 Ulnar neuropathy Ulnar nerve transposition 10 64 62 130 –30 100 70 60 70 Triceps avulsion Triceps repair 11 81 36 135 –15 120 78 70 85 Triceps weakness No 12 60 63 130 –30 100 70 68 70 Ulnar neuropathy No Means 61 63 134 –18 117 74 69 80 Procedures Patients were assessed for subjec- The 9 postoperative complications The TEA technique was well tive pain relief and functional gains were ulnar neuropathy (3 cases), triceps described by Morrey and Adams11 at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, weakness (2), triceps avulsion (1), olec- and Morrey and colleagues12 and is and yearly thereafter. Postoperative ranon fracture (1), superficial infection addressed only briefly here. We used ROM was quantified, and in all (1), and deep infection (1). All exten- a standard posterior exposure, exploit- cases radiographs were reviewed sor mechanism complications (triceps ing old incisions when possible, and for evidence of loosening. For each weakness, triceps avulsion) occurred in the Bryan-Morrey triceps-sparing patient, a postoperative performance patients with previous olecranon oste- exposure13 in 8 cases. Complex skel- index, or elbow score, was calcu- otomies. Two patients required addi- etal deformities, often encountered, lated using the method described by tional surgery (1 triceps repair and 1 necessitated minor modifications. In Morrey and Adams.11 ulnar nerve transposition). The other 2 9 cases, release with anterior trans- Mean follow-up after TEA was 63 patients with ulnar neuropathy had reso- position of the ulnar nerve was per- months (range, 36-94 months). ROM lution of their paresthesias in less than 6 formed. Cultures were obtained to and performance index were deter- months. The patient with deep infection rule out infected nonunion. mined at 2-year follow-up. elected to use suppressive antibiotics. “...we agree that a complete release and transposition of the ulnar nerve should be considered in the treatment of any distal humerus nonunion.’’ In all patients, a semiconstrained RESULTS There was evidence of radiographic Coonrad-Morrey prosthesis (Zimmer, After semiconstrained TEA for lucency around the humeral implants Warsaw, Ind) was set in place with long-standing distal humerus non- in 3 patients at 36-month follow-up. third-generation cement, often con- unions in these 12 patients, flexion One implant was clearly infected taining antibiotics. Care was taken to averaged 134° (range, 120°-150°) (same patient just described). The achieve a good cement mantle. Wounds to 18° (range, 0°-40°) of exten- other 2 had asymptomatic lucency were closed over suction drains, and sion, and pronation averaged 74° around the cement mantle on the long-arm splints positioned over the (range, 60°-80°) to 69° (range, humeral and ulnar sides and contin- extremity in 90° of flexion remained 55°-80°) of supination. Mean total ued to be monitored radiographically in place for 10 days. arc of motion was 117°; 11 of 12 each year. patients had a functional total arc At final follow-up, 7 of the 12 Postoperative Care and Assessment of motion (≥100°). Mean perfor- patients reported no pain (Figure), Patients were discharged home mance index (elbow score) was 4 had occasional pain with activity, between postoperative days 2 and 80 points (range, 57-100 points; and 1 had a painful, infected arthro- 4. Active range of motion (ROM) Table). Based on joint function plasty. All but the patient with the was initiated 1 week after surgery in and pain, this index has 100 points infected arthroplasty believed the patients treated with a triceps-sparing assigned to the areas of motion procedure had provided excellent approach. Supervised therapy was (40), pain (35), strength (20), and pain relief and substantial func- not required. stability (5). tional gains. 532 The American Journal of Orthopedics® D. M. LaPorte et al DISCUSSION treated with extensile exposure, mobi- option, especially for low-demand Nonunion of a distal humerus fracture lization and transposition of the ulnar elderly patients with or without is uncommon and difficult to man- nerve, external neurolysis of the ulnar sufficient bone stock.11 For the 36- age. The condition is compounded nerve, anterior and posterior capsulec- year-old patient included in the cur- by the presence of poor bone stock, tomy, reconstruction of intra-articular rent study, the decision to proceed osteoporotic bone, or both, as often is defects, rigid internal fixation, iliac with TEA was based on poor bone found in the elderly.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Pycnodysostosis with a Cathepsin K Mutation: a Case Report
    Ada Medica et Biologica Vol. 49, No.l, 31-37, 2001 Pycnodysostosis with a Cathepsin K Mutation: A Case Report Hiroshi YAMAGIWA1, Mayumi ASAOKA2, Hisayoshi KATO2, Minoru SHIBATA3, and Naoto ENDO1 'Department of Orthopedic Surgery, "Rehabilitation, and 3Plastic Surgery, Niigata University School of Medicine, Niigata, Japan Received October 16 2000 ; accepted January 22 2001 Summary.Pycnodysostosis (PKND) is a type of osteo- the distal phalanges, frequent fractures, and skull sclerosing bone disease. Recent studies have demon- deformities with delayed suture closure4'5'. The cathe- strated that several cathepsin K mutations can be psin K gene, which wa cloned originally from rabbit identified in PKND families. A fifty-three-year-old Japanese womandiagnosed with PKND with typical osteoclasts6', was highly expressed in osteoclasts. features suffered from the nonunion of the right tibial This molecule plays an important role in bone resorp- shaft. We did open reduction and performed a vascular- tion and remodeling. Cathepsin K knockout mice ized fibular graft using an external fixator. A low- show impaired osteoclastic bone resorption, which intensity pulsed ultrasound device was used three leads to osteopetrosis7'8). Recent studies have demon- months after surgery. Union of the tibia was completed strated several mutations in patients with about one year after surgery. Histomorphometric anal- PKND1'9-10'11'. In this paper, we present a clinical, ysis of the iliac bone revealed that the patient had low histomorphometric, and genomic study of a patient turnover bone with increased bone volume. Analysis of with the typical form of pycnodysostosis. Since the cathepsin K coding region from the genomic DNA parental consanguinity has been noted in more than of the patient and her family (consanguineous parents 30% of cases, we also analyzed her consanguineous and three sisters who were all of normal stature) revealed that the patient had a deletion of genomic parents and three sisters.
    [Show full text]
  • Fragility Fractures and Imminent Fracture Risk in Hong Kong: One of the Cities with Longest Life Expectancies
    Archives of Osteoporosis (2019) 14:104 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11657-019-0648-4 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Fragility fractures and imminent fracture risk in Hong Kong: one of the cities with longest life expectancies Ronald Man Yeung Wong1 & Wing Tung Ho1 & Law Sheung Wai1 & Wilson Li2 & Wai Wang Chau1 & Kwoon-Ho Simon Chow1 & Wing-Hoi Cheung1 Received: 6 May 2019 /Accepted: 27 August 2019 # International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2019 Abstract Introduction Imminent fracture risk, or fractures within 2 years of an initial fracture, is a pressing issue worldwide. Hong Kong is a city with one of the longest life expectancies. The concern of fragility fractures and the imminent risk of a subsequent fracture is becoming a top priority. The objective of this study was to present the epidemiology of incident fragility fractures of all public acute hospitals and the imminent risk of a subsequent fracture in Hong Kong. Methodology This was a retrospective population-based analysis. Patient records from all acute hospitals in Hong Kong from 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2018 were retrieved for patients ≥ 50 years of age with hip, distal radius, or proximal humerus fractures. Secondary fractures and falls were identified in the subsequent 5 years. Post hoc analysis in recent 2013–2018 period was performed. Overall survival (re-fracture incidence) on age subgroups using Kaplan survival analysis and variables was compared using the log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard regressions, obtaining the hazard ratios (HR) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI), were used. Results There is an overall increasing trend of fragility fractures (hip, distal radius, proximal humerus) from 5596 in 2004 to 8465 in 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Nonunion with Bone Loss
    Nonunion with Bone Loss Tim Weber, MD Jeff Anglen, MD, FACS Original Authors; March 2004; Revised June 2006 and 2010 Etiology • Open fracture – segmental – post debridement – blast injury • Infection • Tumor resection • Osteonecrosis Classification Salai et al. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 119 Classification Not Widely Used Not Validated Not Predictive Salai et al. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 119 Evaluation • Soft tissue envelope • Infection • Joint contracture and range of motion • Nerve function: sensation, motor • Vasculature: perfusion, angiogram? • Location and size of defect • Hardware • General health of the host • Psychosocial resources Is it Salvageable? • Vascularity - warm ischemia time • Intact sensation or tibial nerve transection • other injuries • Host health • magnitude of reconstructive effort vs patient’s tolerance • ultimate functional outcome Priorities • Resuscitate • Restore blood supply • Remove dead or infected tissue (Adequate debridement) • Restore soft tissue envelope integrity • Restore skeletal stability • Rehabilitation Bone Loss - Initial Treatment • Irrigation and Debridement Bone Loss - Initial Treatment • Irrigation and Debridement • External fixation Bone Loss - Initial Treatment • Irrigation and Debridement • External fixation • Antibiotic bead spacers Bone Loss - Initial Treatment • ANTIBIOTIC BEAD POUCH – ANTIBIOTIC IMPREGNATED METHYL- METHACRALATE BEADS – SEALED WITH IOBAN Bone Loss - Initial Treatment • Irrigation and Debridement • External fixation • Antibiotic block spacers Beads Block Bone Loss - Initial
    [Show full text]
  • Fractures of the Proximal Humerus
    Fractures of the Proximal Humerus David Rothberg, MDa,*, Thomas Higgins, MDb KEYWORDS Proximal humerus fracture Neer classification Fibular strut Shoulder arthroplasty KEY POINTS Proximal humeral fractures are common. Classification systems have evolved to develop treatment guidelines. Bone quality must be considered for treatment. Surgical stabilization may require augmentation. Arthroplasty must be considered especially in the elderly. INTRODUCTION common osteoporotic extremity fracture after hip fractures and distal radius fractures.1 Greater Proximal humeral fractures are common, with low- than 70% of these fractures occur in patients older energy injuries occurring in the elderly population than 60 years, with a 4:1 female/male ratio and an and less frequent higher-energy fractures striking incidence steadily increasing after the age of 40 young people. The decision to pursue operative years. or nonoperative treatment is driven by the func- Independent risk factors for proximal humeral tional goals and the degree of displacement of fractures include a recent decline in health status, the proximal humeral anatomic parts. Operative insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, infrequent management is based on the ability to obtain walking, indicators of neuromuscular weakness, and maintain reduction, vascularity of the articular diminished femoral neck bone density, height/ segment, quality of soft-tissue attachments, and weight loss, previous falls, impaired balance, and bone porosity. Despite much study, the optimal maternal history of hip fractures.2 In a 3-decade treatment of significantly displaced fracture population-based study of osteoporotic proximal patterns remains controversial. humeral fractures, Palvanen and colleagues3 found that the incidence in patients older than 60 EPIDEMIOLOGY years increased by 13.7% per year of age.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Union Humeral Shaft Fracture with Hardware Failure
    Non-Union Humeral Shaft Fracture with Hardware Failure Molly Hovendick, MAT, ATC, LAT., Northeastern State University Dylan Morris, DO., Oklahoma State University- Center for Health Sciences Matthew O’Brien, PhD, ATC, LAT., Oklahoma State University- Center for Health Sciences Introduction: Humeral shaft fractures account for three to five percent of all fractures. The unique aspect of this case was the patient suffered from a nonunion humeral fracture and subsequently suffered from surgical hardware failure as well. Background: The patient is a right hand dominant 66-year-old male who presented to the emergency department with left arm pain and disability due to a fall from standing height. Initially, he was treated conservatively and placed into a functional brace. At the follow up visit approximately one month later, he reported continued pain and discomfort in his upper extremity. Although there was concern of a possible delayed union due to a history of cigarette smoking and possible noncompliance with post- operative restrictions the patient elected to proceed with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) the following day. Shortly following surgery, the patient reported a fall reinjuring his left shoulder while mowing his lawn. Previous symptoms were aggravated and signs of hardware failure through the locking plate was suspected. The decision to perform revision ORIF of the fracture using interfragmentary compression plating with lag screw fixation and bone grafting was made and performed approximately seven months following the initial surgery. Discussion: This case report highlights that while the majority of humeral shaft fractures can successfully be treated conservatively, this method may fail and require delayed open reduction internal fixation.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 12 the Profher Trial Sling Immobilisation Leaflet
    DOI: 10.3310/hta19240 HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 2015 VOL. 19 NO. 24 Appendix 12 The ProFHER trial sling immobilisation leaflet Fractured Proximal Humerus Information for patients on initial self-care You have been given this leaflet because the top end of your upper arm bone is broken. This is called a 'proximal humerus fracture'. This leaflet is to remind you of the advice on self-care that you will receive from your hospital staff. Members of staff will be 1a happy to explain any of the matters raised in this leaflet and you can also ask your family doctor (GP) for further advice when you have left hospital. This leaflet covers the first few weeks after your injury when your arm is in a sling. People are usually advised to wear their sling for about three weeks. The sling will ease Swathe the pain and help the bone and soft tissues to heal, so it is important that you wear it Sling both day and night. The sling should support the weight of your arm. In some hospitals, depending on the consultant’s preference, the sling is secured by a ‘swathe’. In others, a ‘collar and cuff’ is used instead of a sling. A well-positioned sling and swathe should look like diagram 1a. Diagram 1b shows a sling without a swathe, and diagram 1c shows a collar and cuff. In the following sections we tell you things you should DO, including some tips on pain ! relief and on how you can make yourself ! more comfortable, things you should NOT ! 1b ! 1c DO, and things you MUST TELL YOUR ! HOSPITAL STAFF OR FAMILY ! DOCTOR (GP) ABOUT.
    [Show full text]
  • Bone Marrow Injection for Treatment of Aneurysmal Bone Cyst
    MOJ Orthopedics & Rheumatology Bone Marrow Injection for Treatment of Aneurysmal Bone Cyst Research Article Abstract Volume 5 Issue 3 - 2016 Study design: Patients had Aneurysmal bone cyst lesion that underwent to be treated by Injection of Autologous Bone Marrow Aspirates (ABM) and follow up of this case for the final results. Patients and Methods: Sixteen patients had had Aneurysmal bone cyst had been treated by ABM injections. Study have 16 patients 11 females (68.75 %) and 5 Department of Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, Egypt Mahmoud I Abdel-Ghany, Assistant male (31.25 %). Age ranged from 3-14 years with average age 7.5 years. Number *Corresponding author: study including 5 cases (31.25 %) with proximal femoral cyst, 9 cases (56.25 %) Professor of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery Faculty of of injections for every patient ranged from 2-6 times with average 4.4 times. This had tibial cyst (2 distal and 7 proximal tibiea) and 2 cases (12.5 %) had proximal Medicine for Girls, Egypt, Email: humeral cyst. All patients treated by injection of Autologous Bone Marrow Aspirates which obtained from the iliac crest. The bone marrow aspirates was Received: February 26, 2016 | Published: July 29, 2016 obtained percutaneous by bone marrow aspiration needle, According to follow up X-ray during injections we decide continuity of injections. Average size of the defect was 2.3 cm. and average amount bone marrow/inj. Was 10.2 cc. Results: Pain Score according to VAS ranged from 3-9 with average 5.7 which was improved to average 1.5 at final follow up.
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Tumour in the Cervical Spine : Case Report and Review of Literature
    http://crcp.sciedupress.com Case Reports in Clinical Pathology 2019, Vol. 6, No. 1 CASE REPORT Brown tumour in the cervical spine : Case report and review of literature S Carta1, A Chungh1, SR Gowda∗1, E Synodinou2, PS Sauve1, JR Harvey1 1Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, UK 2Wessex Kidney Centre, Queen Alexandra Hospital, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, UK Received: September 16, 2019 Accepted: October 18, 2019 Online Published: October 30, 2019 DOI: 10.5430/crcp.v6n1p27 URL: https://doi.org/10.5430/crcp.v6n1p27 ABSTRACT Background: Brown tumour of the cervical spine is very rare and is formed due to focal altered bone remodelling secondary to persistent and uncontrolled primary or secondary hyperparathyroidism. It is considered an extreme form of osteitis fibrosa cystica that occurs in the settings of persistently elevated parathyroid hormone. Case Report: This a unique lesion presented in a 48 year old male with recurrent bone pain and known End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) on maintenance haemodialysis. The main clinical complaints were weak and painful legs and the initial presentation was after the patient collapsed at home and fractured spinal level C2. The initial assessment included blood tests and radiological imaging. CT scanning of the spine revealed a destructive lytic lesion with loss of height and architectural changes of the C2 vertebral body and cord compression. The differentials included an acute fracture, a metastatic lesion and Brown’s tumour. Further imaging with an MRI of the spine and PET-CT were performed which confirmed the above lesion and excluded metastatic disease and bone marrow infiltration.
    [Show full text]
  • General Principles in the Assessment and Treatment of Nonunions
    General Principles in the Assessment and Treatment of Nonunions Jaimo Ahn, MD, PhD & Matthew Sullivan, MD Revised February 2017 Previous Authors: Peter Cole, MD; March 2004 Matthew J. Weresh, MD; Revised August 2006 Hobie Summers, MD & Daniel S. Chan MD; Revised April 2011 Definitions • Nonunion: (reasonably arbitrary) – A fracture that is not currently healed and is not going to • Delayed union: – A fracture that requires more time than usual to heal – Shows healing progress over time Definitions • Nonunion: A fracture that is a minimum of 9 months post occurrence and is not healed and has not shown radiographic progression for 3 months (FDA 1986) • Not pragmatic – Prolonged morbidity – Narcotic abuse – Professional and/or emotional impairment Definitions (pragmatic) • Nonunion: A fracture that has no potential to heal without further intervention All images unless indicated: Rockwood and Green's Fractures in Adults, 8th Edition 2015 Classification 1. Hypertrophic 2. Oligotrophic 3. Atrophic = Avascular 4. Pseudarthrosis Weber and Cech, 1976 Hypertrophic • Vascularized • Callus formation present on x-ray • “Elephant’s foot” - abundant callus • “Horse’s hoof” - less abundant callus Biology is more than sufficient but can’t consolidate likely need mechanically favorable solution Oligotrophic • Some/minimal callus on x-ray – Not an aggressive healing response, but not completely void of biologic activity • Vascularity is present on bone scan Is there sufficient biology / mechanics for healing? Atrophic • No evidence of callous formation
    [Show full text]
  • Proximal Humerus Fracture (Conservative Management) 1 and 2-Part Fractures This Leaflet Provides More Information About Proximal Humerus Fractures
    Proximal Humerus Fracture (Conservative Management) 1 and 2-part fractures This leaflet provides more information about proximal humerus fractures. If you have any further questions or concerns, please speak to the Physiotherapy Department, Ground Floor, St James Wing, St George’s Hospital. What is proximal humerus fracture and why have I got it? Your shoulder is a ball and socket joint made up of the upper arm bone (humerus) and shoulder blade (scapula). Your injury is a break or fracture to the upper or ‘proximal’ part of the humerus bone. Proximal humerus fractures are common. They are the third most common fracture type in individuals over 65 years of age and may occur when falling on to your arm. Your fracture will be confirmed on x-ray. What are the signs and symptoms? Pain Bruising and swelling Difficulty moving your arm Apprehension and anxiety about moving your arm. What to expect? Proximal humerus fractures are often linked to shoulder stiffness. Following this type of injury the main aim is to regain enough movement to perform day to day activities and help may be required initially. 1- and 2-part fractures can be managed successfully without an operation. Proximal humerus fractures will heal, typically within 6-12 weeks, even if the humerus is broken into two parts. Recovery can take up to six months, occasionally longer, for your symptoms to settle completely. Do I need any tests to confirm the diagnosis? If it is suspected that you have a proximal humerus fracture an x-ray and clinical assessment by a doctor in the emergency department would confirm your diagnosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Management of Proximal Humeral Fractures Based on Current Literature
    This is an enhanced PDF from The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery The PDF of the article you requested follows this cover page. Management of Proximal Humeral Fractures Based on Current Literature Shane J. Nho, Robert H. Brophy, Joseph U. Barker, Charles N. Cornell and John D. MacGillivray J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:44-58. doi:10.2106/JBJS.G.00648 This information is current as of October 8, 2007 Reprints and Permissions Click here to order reprints or request permission to use material from this article, or locate the article citation on jbjs.org and click on the [Reprints and Permissions] link. Publisher Information The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 20 Pickering Street, Needham, MA 02492-3157 www.jbjs.org Nho_00648.fm Page 44 Monday, September 10, 2007 2:01 PM 44 COPYRIGHT © 2007 BY THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY, INCORPORATED Management of Proximal Humeral Fractures Based on Current Literature By Shane J. Nho, MD, MS, Robert H. Brophy, MD, Joseph U. Barker, MD, Charles N. Cornell, MD, and John D. MacGillivray, MD Introduction greater tuberosity fractures, an anterosuperior approach roximal humeral fractures are the second most com- along the Langer lines extending from the lateral aspect of mon upper-extremity fracture and the third most com- the acromion toward the lateral tip of the coracoid is used. Pmon fracture, after hip fractures and distal radial The split occurs in the anterolateral raphe and allows expo- fractures, in patients who are older than sixty-five years of sure of the displaced greater tuberosity fracture.
    [Show full text]
  • Humerus Fracture
    Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust Virtual Fracture Clinic Patient information Humerus Fracture Specialist Support This leaflet can be made available in another language, large print or another format. Please speak to the Virtual Fracture Clinic who can advise you Humerus VFC DCR leaflet 18 5871.indd 1 12/12/2018 09:42:15 This information leaflet follows up your recent conversation with the Fracture Clinic, where your case was reviewed by an orthopaedic Consultant (Bone specialist). You have sustained a fracture (break) to your Humerus (upper arm bone). The Virtual Fracture Clinic letter will detail where the fracture is. This is a very painful injury due to muscle spasms and the bone ends moving. Regular painkillers will be required during your healing stage to aid recovery. The treatment centre you attended will have provided you with a type of sling called a “collar and cuff”. This is the correct type of sling initially for this type of injury. This should be worn at all times. If you are worried that you are unable to follow this rehabilitation plan, or have any questions, then please contact us by using the contact numbers on the front of this leaflet. Healing: It takes approximately 12 weeks to heal. To fully resolve can take up to 1 year. Pain and This can be a painful injury. You are likely to swelling: experience significant swelling & bruising that can track down your chest, arm and into your hand. Take regular painkillers and ensure regular movement of fingers wrist and elbow. You may find it easier to sleep in an upright position.
    [Show full text]