Treatment of four-part proximal humerus fractures with depressed humeral head collapse using strut allograft with locking plates / 中国骨伤

OBJECTIVE@#To evaluate the clinical outcomes of allogeneic femoral head as strut allograft combined with proximal humeral internal locking system (PHILOS) in the treatment of proximal humeral Neer grade Ⅳ fracture with humeral head collapse.@*METHODS@#From January 2018 to November 2020, 18 patients with Neer grade Ⅳ fracture with humeral head collapse were treated with strut allograft with PHILOS, including 4 males and 14 females, aged from 55 to 78 years old, with an average of (68.11±7.20) years old. The operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage volume, fracture healing time, neck-shaft angle and the height of the humeral head, failure of internal fixation the shoulder function at the last follow-up was assessed using Neer's scoring system.@*RESULTS@#All 18 patients were followed up, and the duration ranged from 10 to 12 months, with an average of (11.08±0.65) months. The operation time was (66.44±5.06) min, the intraoperative bleeding volume was (206.67±36.14) ml, the postoperative drainage volume was (76.11±9.63) ml, and the fracture healing time was (17.28±3.92) weeks. At the last follow-up, the degree of loss of neck-shaft angle was (5.44±0.86) ° and the loss of the height of humeral head was (1.43±0.27) mm. All 18 patients had healing without complications such as fracture, withdrawal, penetration of internal fixation and necrosis of humeral head. According to Neer's evaluation standard, the total score was (89.61±5.60), 10 cases got an excellent result, 6 good, 2 fair.@*CONCLUSION@#Allogeneic femoral head combined with PHILOS is an appropriate treatment for the four-part proximal humerus fractures with humeral head collapse, exhibiting good clinic outcome.

Medium- to Long-term Results of Strut Allografts Treating Periprosthetic Bone Defects / 대한고관절학회지

PURPOSE: We evaluated the medium- to long-term outcomes of cortical strut allografts used to treat periprosthetic bone defects to better understand the correlation between radiological and clinical outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed outcomes from 19 patients undergoing cortical strut allografts to treat periproshtetic bone defects from 2001 to 2015. The mean age at index operation was 59.4 years and the average follow-up period was 8.6 years. Surgeries were performed because of aseptic loosening (n=9), periprosthetic fractures (n=5), and infections (n=5). Each case was characterized and described in detail including the length of allograft and the union period; possible correlations between allograft length and detailed classification and union period was analyzed. Clinical evaluations included the Harris hip score and Kaplan-Meier survivorship. RESULTS: In revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), the average length of allografts used in patients experiencing fractures was significantly longer than those with aseptic loosening or infection. Of the 19 cases, incorporation was observed in 18 cases (94.7%). The average time to incorporation was 21.2 months and the time to incorporation was not significantly different among the two groups (fracture vs. aseptic loosening or infection). No positive correlation was identified between the length of allograft and incorporation period or in the time to cortical strut allograft incorporation among Paprosky or Vancouver subgroups. CONCLUSION: Results of cortical strut allografts show excellent incorporation rates based on medium- to long-term follow-up. Cortical strut allografts may be considered useful for the treatment of femoral bone defects experienced during revision THA and following periprosthetic fracture.

Preventing Varus Deformity in Senile Patients with Proximal Humerus Fractures and Poor Medial Support

BACKGROUND: We investigated the effectiveness of fibular strut allograft augmentation of proximal humerus fractures to prevent varus deformity in patients over the age of 65 years with insufficient medial support. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical and radiological outcomes of locking plate fixation with adjunct fibular strut allograft augmentation in 21 patients with proximal humeral fractures. The inclusion criteria were age (65-year-old or older); presence of severe medial comminution; inadequate medial support; and those who could participate in at least a one year follow-up. The average age was 76.4 years. We analyzed each patient's Constant score, our indicator of clinical outcome. As radiological parameters, we analyzed time-to-bone union; restoration of the medial hinge; difference between the immediately postoperative and the last follow-up humeral neck-shaft angles;; and anatomical reduction status, which was assessed using the Paavolainen method. RESULTS: A successful bone union was achieved in all patients at an average of 11.4 weeks. We found that the average Constant score was 74.2, showing a satisfactory outcome. The average difference in the humeral neck-shaft angles between the immediately postoperative time-point and at the final follow-up was 3.09°. According to the Paavolainen method, the anatomical reduction was rated excellent. The medial hinge was restored in 14 of 21 patients. Although we did not find evidence for osteonecrosis, we found that a single patient had a postoperative complication of screw cut-out. CONCLUSIONS: Fibular strut allografting as an adjunct treatment of proximal humeral fractures may reduce varus deformity in patients with severe medial comminution.

Preventing Varus Deformity in Senile Patients with Proximal Humerus Fractures and Poor Medial Support

BACKGROUND: We investigated the effectiveness of fibular strut allograft augmentation of proximal humerus fractures to prevent varus deformity in patients over the age of 65 years with insufficient medial support. METHODS: We analyzed the clinical and radiological outcomes of locking plate fixation with adjunct fibular strut allograft augmentation in 21 patients with proximal humeral fractures. The inclusion criteria were age (65-year-old or older); presence of severe medial comminution; inadequate medial support; and those who could participate in at least a one year follow-up. The average age was 76.4 years. We analyzed each patient's Constant score, our indicator of clinical outcome. As radiological parameters, we analyzed time-to-bone union; restoration of the medial hinge; difference between the immediately postoperative and the last follow-up humeral neck-shaft angles;; and anatomical reduction status, which was assessed using the Paavolainen method. RESULTS: A successful bone union was achieved in all patients at an average of 11.4 weeks. We found that the average Constant score was 74.2, showing a satisfactory outcome. The average difference in the humeral neck-shaft angles between the immediately postoperative time-point and at the final follow-up was 3.09°. According to the Paavolainen method, the anatomical reduction was rated excellent. The medial hinge was restored in 14 of 21 patients. Although we did not find evidence for osteonecrosis, we found that a single patient had a postoperative complication of screw cut-out. CONCLUSIONS: Fibular strut allografting as an adjunct treatment of proximal humeral fractures may reduce varus deformity in patients with severe medial comminution.

Proximal Humerus Nonunion: Operated with Fibular Strut Allograft and Locking Plate.

Proximal humerus fracture is one of the common fractures seen in practice. Being metaphyseal region, it is less prone for nonunion. Although more than 80% of these heal with no surgical intervention, displaced unimpacted surgical neck fractures are associated with a higher incidence of nonunion with rates varying from less than 1% to as high as 23%. We report a case of 35-year-old male with nonunion following fracture of left proximal humerus.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with a Strut Allograft and an Extensively Porous-Coated Femoral Stem

PURPOSE: We wanted to report on the outcomes of using a strut allograft and extensively porous-coated femoral stems in revision total hip arthroplasty that was performed due to extensive femoral bone loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 1998 and 2005, we performed 167 consecutive revision total hip arthroplasties. Among them, twelve cementless femoral revision surgeries with a strut allograft and extensively porous-coated stems were retrospectively reviewed. The average follow up was 4.6 years. The average age at the time of the index revision was 55.9 years. The reasons for the revisions were periprosthetic fracture due to extensive osteolysis in 5 hips and aseptic loosening in 7 hips. RESULTS: The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 40.8 points before revision surgery to a mean of 85.1 points at the latest follow up. Radiographic evidence of bony stable stems were present in 11 hips and a fibrous stable stem was present in 1 hip. Moderate stress-shielding was noticed in one hip. Nonunion of the allograft was observed in 1 hip due to deep infection. To date, no significant wear or osteolysis has been observed. CONCLUSION: Revision total hip arthroplasty with a strut allograft and an extensively porous-coated femoral stem for treating cases of extensive femoral bone loss seems to be a reasonable choice. However, the concerns related to stress shielding, the difficulties in re-revisions and the complications associated with an allograft will require longer term follow up.

Revision Arthroplasty for the Aseptic Loosening after Semiconstrained Total Elbow Replacement: Midterm Results / 대한정형외과학회잡지

PURPOSE: To analyze the clinical results of revision arthroplasty for aseptic loosening after performing semiconstrained total elbow replacement. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed fifteen patients that had undergone aseptic loosening after semiconstrained total elbow replacement who also had revision arthroplasty. There were 4 men and 11 women, with a mean age of 57 years. The average duration of follow-up was 54 months. The primary causes of arthroplasty were posttraumatic arthrosis (five cases), rheumatoid arthritis (four cases), primary osteoarthritis (four cases), ankylosis (one case) and Charcot joint (one case). For eleven (73%) elbows, the cementing technique was considered marginal or inadequate at the time of primary arthroplasty. An impaction bone graft was used in seven patients at revision, a strut allograft was used in four patients and cement alone was used in four patients. RESULTS: The average preoperative Mayo elbow performance score was 56.6 points; the average postoperative score was 84.5 points. At the latest follow-up, according to the Mayo elbow performance index, six patient elbows showed an excellent result, six patient elbows showed a good result, one patient elbow had a fair result and two patient elbows showed a poor result. Aseptic loosening occurred in three of four elbows that had been revised with cement only. CONCLUSION: Revision arthroplasty for aseptic loosening after semiconstrained total elbow replacement was useful for the relief of pain, maintenance of stability and the activities of daily living. A poor cementing technique and an inadequate selection of implant may be associated with loosening as a main risk factor. Revision using an impaction graft or strut allograft can be a reliable technique for treating a failed total elbow arthroplasty with massive bone loss.