• Sonya Khurana, Roy I Davidovitch, Young K Kwon, Joseph D Zuckerman, and Kenneth A Egol.
• Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013). 2016 Sep 1; 74 (3): 212-8.

BackgroundIn order to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with locked plating to hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of three- and four-part proximal humerus fractures, we compared two groups of patients treated during the same time period.Materials And MethodsSixty-five patients who underwent repair of a three- or four-part proximal humerus fracture with locked plates (Group A) were identified in a prospective database and were compared to 29 patients who underwent hemiarthroplasty for similar injuries (Group B). Data was collected for both groups. Shoulder motion was measured and functional outcomes were obtained using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.ResultsThe mean length of follow-up for the ORIF group was 16 months compared to 44 months for the hemiarthroplasty group. The average postoperative forward flexion for patients in Group A was 131.1° and 110.4° for Group B (p < 0.047). There were no differences in DASH scores at latest follow-up (p = 0.64). Two patients in Group A had radiographic signs of osteonecrosis but had elected for no further surgery. One patient in Group A and two patients in Group B underwent a conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty. There was no difference in the rate of secondary surgery (p = 0.98).ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that ORIF using locked plates leads to similar postoperative function compared to hemiarthroplasty. Patients who underwent ORIF did achieve greater forward shoulder flexion. Neither strategy leads to a higher reoperation rate.

39 keywords...

hide…