College of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2022 Jun;31(6):e259-e269. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.11.016. Epub 2021 Dec 29.
Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are managed with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), hemiarthroplasty (HA), reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), or nonoperatively. Given the mixed results in the literature, the optimal treatment is unclear to surgeons. The purpose of this study was to survey orthopedic shoulder and trauma surgeons to identify the patient- and fracture-related characteristics that influence surgical decision-making.
We distributed a 23-question closed-response email survey to members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Orthopaedic Trauma Association. Questions posed to respondents included demographics, surgical planning, indications for ORIF and arthroplasty, and the use of surgical augmentation with ORIF. Numerical and multiple-choice responses were compared between shoulder and trauma surgeons using unpaired t-tests and χ tests, respectively.
Respondents included 172 shoulder and 78 trauma surgeons. When surgery is indicated, most shoulder and trauma surgeons treat 2-part (69%) and 3-part (53%) PHFs with ORIF. Indications for managing PHFs with arthroplasty instead of ORIF include an intra-articular fracture (82%), bone quality (76%), age (72%), and previous rotator cuff dysfunction (70%). In patients older than 50 years, 90% of respondents cited a head-split fracture as an indication for arthroplasty. Both shoulder and trauma surgeons preferred RSA for treating PHFs presenting with a head-split fracture in an elderly patient (94%), pre-existing rotator cuff tear (84%), and pre-existing glenohumeral arthritis with an intact cuff (75%). Similarly, both groups preferred ORIF for PHFs in young patients with a fracture dislocation (94%). In contrast, although most trauma surgeons preferred to manage PHFs in low functioning patients with a significantly displaced fracture or nonreconstructable injury nonoperatively (84% and 86%, respectively), shoulder surgeons preferred either RSA (44% and 46%, respectively) or nonoperative treatment (54% and 49%, respectively) (P < .001). Similarly, although trauma surgeons preferred to manage PHFs in young patients with a head-split fracture or limited humeral head subchondral bone with ORIF (98% and 87%, respectively), shoulder surgeons preferred either ORIF (54% and 62%, respectively) or HA (43% and 34%, respectively) (P < .001).
ORIF and HA are preferred for treating simple PHFs in young patients with good bone quality or fracture dislocations, whereas RSA and nonoperative management are preferred for complex fractures in elderly patients with poor bone quality, rotator cuff dysfunction, or osteoarthritis. The preferred management differed between shoulder and trauma surgeons for half of the common PHF presentations, highlighting the need for future research.
肱骨近端骨折(PHF)的治疗方法包括切开复位内固定(ORIF)、人工半肩关节置换术(HA)、反式肩关节置换术(RSA)或非手术治疗。由于文献中的结果存在差异,因此哪种治疗方法最有效尚不清楚。本研究旨在调查肩肘外科医生和创伤外科医生,以确定影响手术决策的患者和骨折相关特征。
我们向美国肩肘外科医生协会和美国创伤协会的成员发送了一份包含 23 个封闭式问题的电子邮件调查。向受访者提出的问题包括人口统计学、手术计划、ORIF 和关节置换术的适应证、ORIF 中使用手术增强的情况。使用未配对 t 检验和 χ 检验分别比较肩肘外科医生和创伤外科医生的数值和多项选择答案。
共有 172 名肩肘外科医生和 78 名创伤外科医生参与了本次研究。当需要手术时,大多数肩肘外科医生和创伤外科医生会使用 ORIF 治疗 2 部分(69%)和 3 部分(53%)PHF。用关节置换术治疗 PHF 而不是 ORIF 的适应证包括关节内骨折(82%)、骨质量(76%)、年龄(72%)和先前的肩袖功能障碍(70%)。对于 50 岁以上的患者,90%的受访者将头劈裂骨折作为关节置换术的适应证。在老年患者出现头劈裂骨折(94%)、存在先前的肩袖撕裂(84%)和先前存在肩袖完整的盂肱关节炎(75%)的情况下,肩肘外科医生和创伤外科医生均首选 RSA 治疗 PHF。同样,两组均首选 ORIF 治疗年轻患者伴骨折脱位(94%)的 PHF。相比之下,尽管大多数创伤外科医生更喜欢对功能低下的患者进行非手术治疗,这些患者的骨折明显移位或无法重建(分别为 84%和 86%),但肩肘外科医生更倾向于 RSA(分别为 44%和 46%)或非手术治疗(分别为 54%和 49%)(P<.001)。同样,尽管创伤外科医生更倾向于用 ORIF 治疗年轻患者伴头劈裂骨折或肱骨头软骨下骨有限(分别为 98%和 87%),但肩肘外科医生更倾向于 ORIF(分别为 54%和 62%)或 HA(分别为 43%和 34%)(P<.001)。
对于年轻患者,骨质量良好或骨折脱位,ORIF 和 HA 是治疗简单 PHF 的首选方法;对于老年患者,骨质量差、肩袖功能障碍或骨关节炎伴复杂骨折,RSA 和非手术治疗是首选。对于常见 PHF 表现的一半,肩肘外科医生和创伤外科医生的首选治疗方法存在差异,这突出了未来研究的必要性。