Sewell M D, Kang S N, Al-Hadithy N, Higgs D S, Bayley I, Falworth M, Lambert S M
The Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, Middlesex HA7 4LP, UK.
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Oct;94(10):1382-9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B10.29248.
There is little information about the management of peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus after total shoulder replacement (TSR). This is a retrospective review of 22 patients who underwent a revision of their original shoulder replacement for peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus with bone loss and/or loose components. There were 20 women and two men with a mean age of 75 years (61 to 90) and a mean follow-up 42 months (12 to 91): 16 of these had undergone a previous revision TSR. Of the 22 patients, 12 were treated with a long-stemmed humeral component that bypassed the fracture. All their fractures united after a mean of 27 weeks (13 to 94). Eight patients underwent resection of the proximal humerus with endoprosthetic replacement to the level of the fracture. Two patients were managed with a clam-shell prosthesis that retained the original components. The mean Oxford shoulder score (OSS) of the original TSRs before peri-prosthetic fracture was 33 (14 to 48). The mean OSS after revision for fracture was 25 (9 to 31). Kaplan-Meier survival using re-intervention for any reason as the endpoint was 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 68 to 98) and 60% (95% CI 30 to 80) at one and five years, respectively. There were two revisions for dislocation of the humeral head, one open reduction for modular humeral component dissociation, one internal fixation for nonunion, one trimming of a prominent screw and one re-cementation for aseptic loosening complicated by infection, ultimately requiring excision arthroplasty. Two patients sustained nerve palsies. Revision TSR after a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture associated with bone loss and/or loose components is a salvage procedure that can provide a stable platform for elbow and hand function. Good rates of union can be achieved using a stem that bypasses the fracture. There is a high rate of complications and function is not as good as with the original replacement.
关于全肩关节置换(TSR)后肱骨假体周围骨折的处理,相关信息较少。这是一项对22例患者的回顾性研究,这些患者因肱骨假体周围骨折伴骨丢失和/或假体组件松动而接受了原肩关节置换的翻修手术。其中有20名女性和2名男性,平均年龄75岁(61至90岁),平均随访42个月(12至91个月):其中16例曾接受过TSR翻修手术。在这22例患者中,12例采用了跨越骨折部位的长柄肱骨组件进行治疗。所有患者的骨折平均在27周(13至94周)后愈合。8例患者接受了肱骨近端切除并进行了骨折部位水平的人工关节置换。2例患者采用了保留原组件的蛤壳式假体进行治疗。假体周围骨折前原TSR的平均牛津肩关节评分(OSS)为33分(14至48分)。骨折翻修后的平均OSS为25分(9至31分)。以因任何原因再次干预作为终点的Kaplan-Meier生存率在1年和5年时分别为91%(95%置信区间(CI)68至98)和60%(95%CI 30至80)。有2例因肱骨头脱位进行了翻修,1例因模块化肱骨组件分离进行了切开复位,1例因骨不连进行了内固定,1例对突出的螺钉进行了修整,1例因无菌性松动并发感染进行了重新骨水泥固定,最终需要进行关节切除成形术。2例患者出现神经麻痹。与骨丢失和/或假体组件松动相关的肱骨假体周围骨折后的TSR翻修是一种挽救性手术,可为肘部和手部功能提供稳定平台。使用跨越骨折部位的柄可以实现较高的愈合率。并发症发生率较高,功能不如初次置换。