Search

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons multicenter taskforce studying proximal humerus fractures reached no consensus on which outcome measures to include in future studies, and currently no gold standard exists. Knowledge of commonly used outcome measures will allow standardization, enabling more consistent proximal humerus fracture treatment comparison. This study identifies the most commonly reported outcome measures for proximal humerus fracture management in recent literature.A systematic review identified all English-language articles assessing proximal humerus fractures from 2008 to 2018 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Review articles, meta-analyses, revision surgery, chronic injuries, studies with15 patients, studies with12 month follow-up, anatomic/biomechanical studies, and technique articles were excluded. Included studies were assessed for patient demographics and outcome scores, patient satisfaction, complications, range of motion, and strength.Of 655 articles, 74 met inclusion criteria. The number of proximal humerus fractures averaged 74.2 per study (mean patient age, 65.6 years). Mean follow-up was 30.7 months. Neer type 1, 2, 3, and 4 fractures were included in 8%, 51%, 81%, and 88% of studies, respectively. Twenty-two patient-reported outcome instruments were used including the Constant-Murley score (65%), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score (31%), visual analog scale pain (27%), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (18%). An average of 2.2 measures per study were reported.Considerable variability exists in the use of outcome measures across the proximal humerus fracture literature, making treatment comparison challenging. We recommend that future literature on proximal humerus fractures use at least 3 outcomes measures and 1 general health score until the optimal scores are determined.

Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are common, and their incidence is increasing as the population ages. Despite this, postoperative rehabilitation remains unstandardized and little is known about surgeon preferences. The aim of this study was to assess differences in postoperative rehabilitation preferences and patient education between orthopedic trauma and shoulder surgeons.An electronic survey was distributed to members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons to assess differences in postoperative rehabilitation preferences and patient counseling. Descriptive statistics were reported for all respondents, trauma surgeons, and shoulder surgeons. Chi-square and unpaired 2-sample t tests were used to compare responses. Multinomial regression was used to further elucidate the influence of fellowship training independent of confounding characteristics.A total of 293 surgeons completed the survey, including 172 shoulder and 78 trauma surgeons. A greater proportion of trauma surgeons preferred an immediate weightbearing status after arthroplasty compared to shoulder surgeons (45% vs. 19%, P = .003), but not after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) (62% vs. 75%, P = .412). A greater proportion of shoulder surgeons preferred home exercise therapy taught by the physician or using a handout following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) (21% vs. 2%, P = .009). A greater proportion of trauma surgeons began passive range of motion (ROM)2 weeks after 2-part fractures (70% vs. 41%, P .001). Conversely, a greater proportion of shoulder surgeons began passive ROM between 2 and 6 weeks for 2-part (57% vs. 24%, P .001) and 4-part fractures (65% vs. 43%, P = .020). On multinomial regression analysis, fellowship training in shoulder surgery was associated with preference for a nonweightbearing duration of12 weeks vs. 6-12 weeks after ORIF. Similarly, fellowship training in shoulder surgery was associated with increased odds of preferring a nonweightbearing duration of6 weeks vs. no restrictions and12 weeks vs. 6-12 weeks after arthroplasty. Training in shoulder surgery was associated with greater odds of preferring a nonweightbearing duration prior to beginning passive ROM of 2-6 weeks vs.2 weeks or6 weeks for 2-part fractures, but not 4-part fractures.Trauma surgeons have a more aggressive approach to rehabilitation following operative PHF repair compared to shoulder surgeons regarding time to weightbearing status and passive ROM. Given the increasing incidence of PHFs and substantial variations in reported treatment outcomes, differences in rehabilitation after PHF treatment should be further evaluated to determine the role it may play in the outcomes of treatment studies.

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 χRespondents 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.

Objectives: Recurrent glenohumeral instability is frequently associated with glenoid and humeral bone loss. It is predictive of capsulolabral repair failure. However, the best way to quantify these shortcomings remains controversial. The aim of our study is to determine the best predictor of recurrent instability after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. Methods: Over the past 10 years, all the patients recruited for shoulder stabilization surgery in 4 academic centers have been included in the prospective cohort called "LUXE". The ISIS score is used to stratify patients for surgery (Bankart, Bankart + Remplissage, Latarjet). Only patients with a preoperative CT scan with 3D reconstruction and clinical follow-up ≥1 year were included. Of a total of 262 patients included in the “LUXE” cohort, 103 met the inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were male (79%) with an average age of 28 years. The median number of dislocations before stabilization surgery was six. Bone deficits were measured on the 3D reconstructions using the Glenoid Clock and Ratio, the Humeral Clock and Ratio and the Glenoid Track methods and the angle of engagement of the Hill-Sachs lesion in the axial plane. Results: Seventy patients had arthroscopic stabilization and 33 a Latarjet procedure. The ISIS scores for the two groups were 2.7 and 4.8 (pConclusion: Despite a lower ISIS score, arthroscopic management with Bankart +/- Remplissage is correlated with a significantly higher recurrence rate compared to the Latarjet procedure. Failure was related to humeral bone loss and to the morphology/orientation of the Hill-Sachs lesion rather than the volume of bone loss.

Introduction Proximal humeral fracture with associated glenohumeral dislocation (PHFD) is a challenging clinical problem. Outcomes of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of these injuries have not been widely reported. The purpose of this analysis is to report our experience with ORIF of PHFD. Methods A retrospective review of our 2 institutions’ shoulder surgery databases was conducted to identify all PHFDs that were treated with ORIF from 2008 through 2017. Radiographs were reviewed for fracture healing by 12 weeks postoperatively. All reoperations were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes using Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) scores at a minimum 2-year follow-up were recorded. Results There were 20 PHFDs identified: they were 50% male, 55.8 ± 10.3 years old (range 31.3-66.3), and had a body mass index of 29.3 ± 8.2 (15.2-47.8). Seven (35%) patients experienced varus collapse, nonunion, or avascular necrosis and 6 (30%) patients underwent reoperation. Of the 17 patients who did not go on to revision or arthroplasty, 14 (82.3%) had patient-reported outcomes at a mean follow-up of 4.9 ± 2.2 years (2.3-8.8). These patients had an average SST 8.0±4.0 yes responses (0-12) and ASES scores of 71.6 ± 20.4 (20.2-94.9). Conclusion ORIF of PHFD carries a high rate of reoperation. In patients who achieve healing, functional scores are satisfactory. This information is important for proper patient counseling prior to surgery.

A 47 year old male is injured in a single car motor vehicle collision when he falls asleep at the wheel. He is unable to lift his arm after the event and is brought by EMS to the hospital. A trauma workup reveals an isolated 3 part proximal humerus fracture.

Background Functional outcomes of distal radius fractures vary widely regardless of treatment methods. Purpose This study aims to verify whether preexisting carpal and carpometacarpal (CMC) osteoarthritis (OA) will negatively impact wrist functional outcome in patients with distal radius fractures. Patients and Methods A retrospective case–control study was done using a prospective trauma database. Patients were matched 1:1 in two groups based on the presence of wrist or carpal arthritis (OA). The groups were matched for sex, follow-up, and treatment type. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 1 year and functional outcomes were assessed using validated scores. Results A total of 61 patients were included. Mean age was 63 years (range: 20–85) and average follow-up was 26 months. There were 31 patients in the OA+ group and 30 in the OA− group. Forty-one patients were treated surgically and 20 nonoperatively. None of the patients in the OA− developed OA during follow-up. Both groups were comparable for sex, residual deformity, and follow-up. There was no significant difference for the visual analog scale, Short Form-12, Quick Disability Arm Shoulder Hand, and Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation, or for radiographic outcomes. Conclusion Preexisting OA in the wrist or CMC does not seem to impact outcomes of distal radius fractures, regardless of treatment, age, or sex. Although this is a negative study, the results are important to help counsel patients with distal radius fractures. Further work must be done to identify other potential causes for negative outcomes. Level of Evidence Level III, prognostic study.

The purpose of this prospective study was to examine the progression of fatty muscle degeneration over time in asymptomatic shoulders with degenerative rotator cuff tears.Subjects with an asymptomatic rotator cuff tear in 1 shoulder and pain due to rotator cuff disease in the contralateral shoulder were enrolled in a prospective cohort. Subjects were followed annually with shoulder ultrasonography, which evaluated tear size, location, and fatty muscle degeneration. Tears that were either full-thickness at enrollment or progressed to a full-thickness defect during follow-up were examined. A minimum follow-up of 2 years was necessary for eligibility.One hundred and fifty-six shoulders with full-thickness rotator cuff tears were potentially eligible. Seventy shoulders had measurable fatty muscle degeneration of at least 1 rotator cuff muscle at some time point. Patients with fatty muscle degeneration in the shoulder were older than those without degeneration (mean, 65.8 years [95% confidence interval (CI), 64.0 to 67.6 years] compared with 61.0 years [95% CI, 59.1 to 62.9 years]; p0.05), and the median size of the tears at baseline was larger in shoulders with degeneration than in shoulders that did not develop degeneration (13 and 10 mm wide, respectively, and 13 and 10 mm long; p0.05). Tears with fatty muscle degeneration were more likely to have enlarged during follow-up than were tears that never developed muscle degeneration (79% compared with 58%; odds ratio, 2.64 [95% CI, 1.29 to 5.39]; p0.05). Progression of fatty muscle degeneration occurred more frequently in shoulders with tears that had enlarged (43%; 45 of 105) than in shoulders with tears that had not enlarged (20%; 10 of 51; p0.05). Additionally, tears with enlargement and progression of muscle degeneration were more likely to extend into the anterior supraspinatus than were those without progression (53% and 17%, respectively; p0.05); however, this relationship was lost when controlling for tear size (p = 0.56). The median time from tear enlargement to progression of fatty muscle degeneration was 1.0 year (range, -2.0 to 6.9 years) for the supraspinatus and 1.1 years (range, -1.8 to 8.5 years) for the infraspinatus muscle (p = 0.98).Progression of fatty muscle degeneration is more common in tears that are larger at baseline, enlarge over time, and undergo a larger magnitude of enlargement. Our study findings also suggest that an often rapid progression of muscle degeneration occurs in relation to a clinically relevant increase in tear size in some degenerative cuff tears.Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Foot and ankle fractures are sometimes seen as routine and easy to treat. However, many fractures vary from typical patterns and require more complex management. Obtaining good outcomes in these situations can be challenging. Often, the difference between average and good results has to do with preoperative planning and good surgical technique. This article outlines numerous techniques and tricks that are not always mentioned in classic textbooks. It focuses on ankle, talus, calcaneus, and midfoot fractures, and discusses numerous techniques and aids to avoid potential problems that may be encountered intraoperatively.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of trabecular metal (TM) acetabular components used in revision hip arthroplasty with major bone deficiency. We retrospectively reviewed the records of 46 patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty with severe acetabular bone loss. Clinical outcomes were assessed using Harris Hip Score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities, and Short-Form 12. Mean follow-up was 50 months. All patients had Paprosky type IIc or III acetabular bone deficiency. Major complications included 1 infection, 2 dislocations, and 1 arterial bleeding. Average Harris Hip Score was 78.2. Short-Form 12 scores were within population-based age-matched averages. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities scores were mainly in the 2 lowest disability categories. Porous tantalum shows promising results in revision arthroplasty with severe acetabular bone loss.

Complications following shoulder arthroplasty result in substantial compromise of ultimate outcome. Proper management is critical to preserve bone and soft tissue in order to maximize pain relief and range of motion. The most prevalent complications include infection, instability, subscapularis failure, and periprosthetic fracture. Incidence of infection has been reported from 0.4 % to 4 %, Propionibacterium acnes being the most commonly reported pathogen. Unexplained or new onset of pain after shoulder arthroplasty should prompt suspicion of infection. The gold standard for diagnosis of infection is culture-positive open biopsy of multiple tissue samples; however P. acnes can be difficult to isolate. Two-stage revision arthroplasty is the preferred method for treating prosthetic joint infections of the shoulder. Periprosthetic humerus fractures are rare with an incidence of 0.6–3 % of all shoulder arthroplasties. Fracture treatment is dictated according to fracture location and stability of the implant. Nonoperative management is preferred for minimally displaced, stable fractures. Surgical treatment is recommended for patients with grossly unstable fractures, with loose stems, or with fractures that have failed nonsurgical treatment. Instability after shoulder arthroplasty occurs in approximately 5 % of all replacements. Depending on the type of dislocation, initial closed reduction can be an effective treatment. Surgical treatment for recurrent instability targets the specific cause. Subscapularis failure following total shoulder arthroplasty can lead to pain, weakness, and instability. Ideal treatment consists of early repair with or without supplementation with a pectoralis major transfer.