Download fulltext HTML

https://doi.org/10.18502/espoch.v2i2.11431

statistics

  • 256 Abstract Views
  • 168 PDF Views
  • 0 HTML Views

authors

  • Santiago Israel Moreno Aviles

    Santiago Israel Moreno Aviles

    Hospital un canto a la vida “Padre Carollo”, Quito, Ecuador. CENREFK, Riobamba, Ecuador.
  • Estefania Aanabel Lozada Tobar

    Estefania Aanabel Lozada Tobar

    Pontiicia Universidad Católica Del Ecuador, Quito, Ecuador.

Published Date

  • Jun 29, 2022

Pseudoarthrosis like a complication in proximal humeral fractures

ESPOCH Congresses: The Ecuadorian Journal of S.T.E.A.M. / Volume 2, Issue 2 / Pages 842-850

Abstract

Proximal humerus fractures (FHP) represent 5 6% of all fractures in adults and occur more frequently in older adults due to poor bone quality, the initial evaluation and knowing the risk factors that the patient may have is essential to determine the most appropriate treatment and avoid complications. Pseudoarthrosis of the proximal humerus, despite having a frequency ranging from 1.1% to 8%, must be studied so that the doctor can resolve it, the elderly population tends to cope well, due to low functional demand, however, younger patients would notice a decrease in function, particularly when the tuberosities and adjacent cuff insertions are involved. The objective of this article was to deepen knowledge about proximal humerus pseudoarthrosis, results of risk factors, as well as their treatment, through a descriptive bibliographic review.


Keywords: proximal humerus, psedoarthrosis, fractures, nonunion.


Resumen


Las fracturas de húmero proximal (FHP) representan el 5-6% de todas las fracturas en adultos y se presentan con mayor frecuencia en adultos mayores debido a la mala calidad ósea, la evaluación inicial y conocer los factores de riesgo que puede tener el paciente es fundamental para determinar el tratamiento más adecuado y evitar complicaciones. La pseudoartrosis del humero proximal a pesar de tener una frecuencia que va de 1.1 % al 8% debe ser estudiada para que el medico la pueda resolver, la población de la tercera edad tiende a sobrellevarlo bien, debido a la baja demanda funcional, sin embargo, los pacientes más jóvenes notarían una disminución en la función, particularmente cuando están involucradas las tuberosidades y las inserciones de los manguitos adyacentes. El objetivo de este artículo fue profundizar conocimientos sobre pseudoartrosis de humero proximal, cuáles son los factores de riesgo, así como su tratamiento, mediante una revisión bibliográfica descriptiva.


Palabras Clave: Humero proximal, Pseudoatrosis, fracturas, no unión.

References
[1] Benegas, E., Zoppi Filho, A., Ferreira Filho, A. A., Ferreira Neto, A. A., Negri, J. H., Prada, F. S., & Zumiotti, A. V. (2007). Surgical treatment of varus malunion of the proximal humerus with valgus osteotomy. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 16(1), 55–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.04.011

[2] Boileau, P., Pennington, S. D., & Alami, G. (2011). Proximal humeral fractures in younger patients: fixation techniques and arthroplasty. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 20(2), S47–S60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.12.006

[3] Bongiovanni, S., Ranalletta, M., & Maignon, G. (2008). Fracturas del humero proximal. Tratamiento con placas bloqueadas. Rev. Asoc. Argent. Ortop. Traumatol, 106–111.

[4] Cadet, E. R., Yin, B., Schulz, B., Ahmad, C. S., & Rosenwasser, M. P. (2013). Proximal humerus and humeral shaft nonunions. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 21(9), 538–547. https://doi.org/10.5435/JAAOS-21-09-538

[5] Carreño, F . Osma, J. (2016). Ortopedia y Traumatologia. Elsevier, 30(2), 426–428. https://www.elsevier.es/es-revista-revista-colombiana-ortopedia-traumatologia-380- articulo-manguito-rotadores-epidemiologia-factores-riesgo-S0120884516300578

[6] Checchia, S. L., Doneux, P., Miyazaki, A. N., Spir, I. A. Z., Bringel, R., & Ramos, C. H. (2000). Classification of non-unions of the proximal humerus. International Orthopaedics, 24(4), 217–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002640000157

[7] Checchia, Sérgio Luis, Miyazaki, A. N., Fregoneze, M., Santos, P. D., da Silva, L. A., & Nascimento, L. G. P. (2009). Pseudarthrosis of the Humeral Neck: Analysis of the Results When Using the Technique Described By Walch Et Al. Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (English Edition), 44(3), 239–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2255- 4971(15)30074-4

[8] Court-Brown, C. M., & McQueen, M. M. (2008). Nonunions of the proximal humerus: Their prevalence and functional outcome. Journal of Trauma - Injury, Infection and Critical Care, 64(6), 1517–1521. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0b013e3181469840

[9] Enrique, R., Cervantes, L., Krappinger, D., Riedl, M., Knierzinger, D., Wahler, W., & Kralinger, F. (2019). Femoral head augmentation in 3-4 part proximal humerus fractures plating in elderly population and it’s failure predictors. December.

[10] Garbayo Marturet, A. J., Tejero Ibáñez, A., Repáraz Padrós, F. J., & Castaño Serrano, A. (2014). Tratamiento de la pseudoartrosis recalcitrante de húmero en pacientes de edad avanzada. Anales Del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, 37(2), 257–264. https://doi.org/10.4321/s1137-66272014000200009

[11] Gómez-Mont Landerreche, J. G., Gil-Orbezo, F., Morales-Domínguez, H., Flores- Carrillo, A., Levy-Holden, G., & Capuano-Tripp, P. (2015). Fracturas de húmero proximal: valoración clínica y resultado funcional en pacientes con osteonecrosis de la cabeza humeral. Acta Ortopédica Mexicana, 29(2), 88–96.

[12] Jacobson, J. A., Duquin, T. R., Sanchez-Sotelo, J., Schleck, C. D., Sperling, J. W., & Cofield, R. H. (2014). Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of proximal humerus malunions. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 23(8), 1232–1239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.11.015

[13] Kannus, P., Palvanen, M., Niemi, S., Parkkari, J., Järvinen, M., & Vuori, I. (2000). Osteoporotic fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly Finnish persons: Sharp increase in 1970-1998 and alarming projections for the new millennium. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica, 71(5), 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1080/000164700317381144

[14] 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 and Research, 64(3), 407–414. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.21563

[15] Klement, M. R., Nickel, B. T., Bala, A., Penrose, C. T., Zura, R. D., & Garrigues, G. E. (2016). Glenohumeral arthritis as a risk factor for proximal humerus nonunion. Injury, 47, S36–S39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(16)30852-X

[16] Lanting, B., MacDermid, J., Drosdowech, D., & Faber, K. J. (2008). Proximal humeral fractures: A systematic review of treatment modalities. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 17(1), 42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.03.016

[17] Maggi, S., Falaschi, P., Marsh, D., & Giordano, S. (2020). The Management of Older Patients with Fragility Fractures Second Edition In collaboration with. http://www.springer.com/series/15090

[18] Maheshwari, J., & Pandey, V. K. (2012). Pseudarthrosis of the surgical neck of humerus treated by buttressing with a medial cortico-cancellous graft. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 46(1), 54–57. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.91635

[19] Martinez, A. A., Calvo, A., Domingo, J., Cuenca, J., & Herrera, A. (2010). Arthroscopic treatment for malunions of the proximal humeral greater tuberosity. International Orthopaedics, 34(8), 1207–1211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-009-0900-4

[20] Mouraria, G. G., Filho, A. Z., Kikuta, F. K., Moratelli, L., Cruz, M. A., & Etchebehere, M. (2019). Anterolateral approaches for proximal humeral osteosynthesis: A systematic review. Acta Ortopedica Brasileira, 27(3), 178–182. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413- 785220192703215572

[21] Rao, D. N. N., & Supradeeptha, D. C. (2019). Study on functional outcome of the proximal humeral internal locking system (PHILOS) for displaced proximal humeral fractures in adults. Surgical Update: International Journal of Surgery and Orthopedics, 5(5), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.17511/ijoso.2019.i05.07

[22] Rodríguez-garcía, M., Mann-arazi, E. El, Salvador, C., & Rojas, J. (2002). Pseudoartrosis del húmero . 16.

[23] Rooney, P. J., & Peter Cockshott, W. (1986). Pseudarthrosis following proximal humeral fractures: A possible mechanism. Skeletal Radiology, 15(1), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00355068

[24] Schumaier, A., & Grawe, B. (2018). Proximal Humerus Fractures: Evaluation and Management in the Elderly Patient. Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation, 9, 215145851775051. https://doi.org/10.1177/2151458517750516

[25] Valencia, M., Barco, R., & Antuña, S. A. (2011). Pseudoartrosis y maluniones de húmero proximal. Revista Espanola de Cirugia Ortopedica y Traumatologia, 55(5), 405–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.recot.2011.05.001

[26] Varacallo, M. A., & Fox, E. J. (2014). Osteoporosis and its complications. Medical Clinics of North America, 98(4), 817–831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcna.2014.03.007

[27] Vigeh, A. V. (2019). Scholarship @ Western.

[28] Walch, G., Badet, R., Nové-Josserand, L., & Levigne, C. (1996). Nonunions of the surgical neck of the humerus: surgical treatment with an intramedullary bone peg, internal fixation, and cancellous bone grafting. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery / American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ... [et Al.], 5(3), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(05)80001-1

[29] Widnall, J. C., Dheerendra, S. K., Malal, J. J. G., & Waseem, M. (2013). Proximal Humeral Fractures: A Review of Current Concepts. The Open Orthopaedics Journal, 7(1), 361–365. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874325001307010361

[30] Willis, M., Min, W., Brooks, J. P., Mulieri, P., Walker, M., Pupello, D., & Frankle, M. (2012). Proximal humeral malunion treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 21(4), 507–513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.042

[31] Yamane, S., Suenaga, N., Oizumi, N., & Minami, A. (2008). Interlocking intramedullary nailing for nonunion of the proximal humerus with the Straight Nail System. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, 17(5), 755–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2008.02.006