DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20214038

Clinico-radiological and functional outcome of Neer’s 2 part, 3 part and 4 part proximal humeral fractures in elderly treated by conservative management in a tertiary care centre of North India

Pankaj Spolia, Abdul Ghani

Abstract


Background: Treatment of proximal humeral fractures is challenging. Despite a rising incidence in proximal humeral fractures, there is still no evidence for the best treatment option, especially for the elderly patients. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the radiological in terms of union and functional outcome in terms of pain, range of motion of conservatively managed proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients.

Methods: This was an observational prospective study of 35 patients aged above 65 years with proximal humeral fractures including 2 part, 3 part and 4 part based on Neer’s classification, treated by conservative method. Functional outcome was assessed by using Constant score at follow up of 1 year.

Results: Out of 35 patients, 21(60%) were female and 14 (40%) were male with mean age of 76.8 (range 65 to 91years). On the basis of Neer’s classification, majority of patients (15, 42.8%) had 3 part fracture. Radiological union was achieved within 13 to 24 weeks, with an average of 18.4 weeks. Out of 35, 5 (14.3%) had excellent outcome, 8 (22.8%) had good functional outcome, 16 (45.7%) had moderate outcome, 6 (17.14%) had poor outcome. The results were comparable with the existing literature.

Conclusion: In the present study, our data shows that the proximal humeral fractures can be effectively managed conservatively in the elderly patients. Two part fractures have best functional outcome and four part fractures have highest rate of complications.


Keywords


Proximal humeral fracture, Neer’s classification, Conservative management, Visual analogue scale, Constant score, Elderly

Full Text:

PDF

References


Buhr AJ, Cooke AM. Fracture patterns. Lancet.1959;1(7072);273:531-6.

Knowelden J, Buhr AJ, Dunbar O. Incidence of fractures in persons over 35 years of age. A report to the M.R.C. Working party on fractures in the elderly. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1964;18(3):130-41.

Court-Brown CM, Garg A, McQueen MM. The epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures. Acta Orthop Scand. 2001;72(4):365-71.

Court -Brown CM, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review. Injury. 2006;37(8):691-7.

Bengner U, Johnell O, Redlund-Johnell I. Changes in the incidence of fracture of the upper end of the humerus during a 30-year period. A study of 2125 fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;231:179-82.

Hanson B, Neidenbach P, de Boer P, Stengel D. Functional outcomes after nonoperative management of fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18 (4):612-21.

Zyto K. Non-operative treatment of comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. Injury.1998;29(5):349-52.

Bell JE. Trends and variation in incidence, surgical treatment, and repeat surgery of proximal humeral fractures in the elderly. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93(2):121-31.

Clavert P, Adam P, Bevort A, Bonnomet F, Kempf JF. Pitfalls and complications with locking plate for proximal humerus fracture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(4):489-94.

Rangan A, Handoll H, Brealey S, Jefferson L, Keding A, Martin BC, et al. Surgical vs. nonsurgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus the PROFHER randomized clinical trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2015;313(10):1037-47.

Olerud P, Ahrengart L, Ponzer S, Saving J, Tidermark J. Internal fixation versus nonoperative treatment of displaced 3-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20 (5):747-55.

Sanders RJ, Thissen LG, Teepen JC, van Kampen A, Jaarsma RL. Locking plate versus nonsurgical treatment for proximal humeral fractures: better midterm outcome with nonsurgical treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20 (7):1118-24.

Fjalestad T, Hole MO, Hovden IA, Blucher J, Stromsoe K. Surgical treatment with an angular stable plate for complex displaced proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Trauma. 2012;26 (2):98-106.

Handoll HH, Brorson S. Interventions for treating proximal humeral fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;11:CD000434.

Neer CS. Displaced proximal humeral fractures. J Bone Jt Surg. 1970;52:1077-89.

Neer II CS. Displaced proximal humerus fracture. Part II. Treatment of 3 part and 4 part fracture displacement. J Bone Joint Surg. 1970; 52-A:1090-103.

Constant CR, Murley AHG. A clinical method of functional assessment of shoulder. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 1987;214:160e4.

Jensen MP. Interpretation of visual analogue scale ratings and change scores. J Pain. 2003;407-14.

Olerud P, Ahrengart L, Ponzer S, Saving J, Tidermark J. Hemiarthroplasty versus nonoperative treatment of displaced 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20(7):1025-337.

Yüksel HY, Yilmaz S, Akşahin E, Celebi L, Muratli HH, Biçimoğlu A. The results of nonoperative treatment for three and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus in low-demand patients. J Orthop Trauma. 2011;25:588-95.

Boons HW, Goosen JH, van Grinsven S, van Susante JL, van Loon CJ. Hemiarthroplasty for humeral four-part fractures for patients 65 years and older: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(12):3483-91.

Rahul B, Utkarsha J, Vikram K, Sanjay D. Comparative study of management of proximal humerus in elderly by conservative method versus operative locking compression plate. J Pharm Biomed Sci. 2015;05 (11):831-8.

Stableforth PG. Four-part fractures of the neck of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1984;66(1):104-108.

Soler-Peiro M, Garcia-Martinez L, Aguilella L, Perez- Bermejo M. Conservative treatment of 3- part and 4-part proximal humeral fractures: a systemic review. J Orthopaed Surg Res. 2020;15:347.

Zyto K, Ahrengart L, Sperber A, Törnkvist H. Treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79:412-7.

Torrens C, Corrales M, Vila G, Santana F, Caceres E. Functional and quality-of-life results of displaced and non-displaced proximal humeral fractures treated conservatively. J Orthopaed Trauma. 2014;28(7): e178-9.

Soni R, Patel A, Patel V, Jha A, Golwala P. Study of outcomes of the proximal humerus fractures treated by various modalities. Int J Orthopaed Sci. 2018;4(1): 41-4.

Ziegler et al. Evaluation of the Constant score: which is the method to assess the objective strength?. BMC musculoskeltal Disord. 2019;20:403.

Canbora MK, Kose O, Polat A, Konukoglu L, Gorgec M. Relationship between the functional outcomes and radiological results of conservatively treated displaced proximal humerus fractures in the elderly: A prospective study. Int J Shoulder Surg. 2013;7:105-9.

Seung-Gil B, Chang-Wug O, Young-Soo B, Jong-Keon O, Joon-Woo K, Jong PY, et al. The result of conservative treatment of proximal humerus fracture in elderly patients. J Korean Fract Soc. 2013;26(4):292-8.

Launonen AP, Sumrein BO, Reito A, Lepola V, Paloneva J, Jonsson KB, et al. Operative versus non-operative treatment for 2- part proximal humerus fracture: A multicenter randomized controlled trial. PLOS Med. 2019;16(7): e1002855.

Marieke EB, Inge HFR, Mostafa El-M, Klaus WW. Outcomes of operative and nonoperative treatment of 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly: a 10-year retrospective cohort study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2019;45:131-8.