Using an Autograft from the Fibula Diaphysis in the Surgical Treatment of Patients with Fractures of the Proximal Humerus on the Background of Critical Osteoporosis

The frequency of unsatisfactory results of surgical treatment of patients with a fracture of the proximal humerus remains high and is up to 40 %. This is primarily due to the early instability of the metal structure against the background of osteoporosis and as a consequence of non-fusion of the fracture and the formation  of a false joint. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of a new surgical method for treating patients with a fracture of the proximal humerus against the background of critical osteoporosis. After the approval of the local ethics Committee, 2 groups of 10 patients were formed in the clinic: the patients of  main group were operated by the proposed method; the group of clinical comparison was operated by the standard method. In all clinical cases, fractures of the proximal humerus were consolidated on control radiographs. VAS assessment the pain syndrome in the early postoperative period showed that there were no  statistically significant differences in the shoulder joint area in the groups. Three months after surgery, when assessing the volume of movement in the shoulder joint (without the participation of the scapula), there was a statistically significant improvement in the main group: abduction – by 35° and external  rotation – by 25° (p<0.05). When assessing the range of motion of the operated shoulder joint using the ASES scale, a  statistically significant improvement was observed in the main group by 11.6 points after 3 months after  surgery. According to the assessment of the patient›s functional recovery according to the DASH scale, the indicators in the main group were statistically significantly better, which indicates a complete recovery of the shoulder joint function. Thus, the use of the proposed new method, in comparison with other known technologies for surgical treatment of fractures of the proximal humerus, allows achieving a more rigid and stable fixation of bone fragments in the aftermath of trauma and the presence of regional osteoporosis.

shoulder joint, fracture of proximal humerus, surgical treatment, osteoporosis

1. Passaretti D, Candela V, Sessa P, Gumina S. Epidemiology of proximal humeral fractures: a detailed survey of 711 patients in a metropolitan area. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017; 26(12): 2117-2124. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.05.029

2. Ziegler P, Maier S, Stöckle U, Gühring M, Stuby FM. The treatment of proximal humerus fracture using internal fixation with fixed-angle plates. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2019; 116(45): 757-763. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2019.0757

3. Bergdahl C, Ekholm C, Wennergren D, Nilsson F, Möller M. Epidemiology and patho-anatomical pattern of 2,011 humeral fractures: data from the Swedish Fracture Register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016; 17: 159. doi: 10.1186/s12891-016-1009-8

4. Katthagen JC, Schwarze M, Warnhoff M, Voigt C, Hurschler C, Lill H. Influence of plate material and screw design on stiffness and ultimate load of locked plating in osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures. Injury. 2016; 47(3): 617-624. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.01.004

5. Karl JW, Olson PR, Rosenwasser MP. The epidemiology of upper extremity fractures in the United States, 2009. J Orthop Trauma. 2015; 29(8): e242-e244. doi: 10.1097/бот.0000000000000312

6. Mellstrand Navarro C, Brolund A, Ekholm C, Heintz E, Hoxha Ekström E, Josefsson PO, et al. Treatment of humerus fractures in the elderly: A systematic review covering effectiveness, safety, economic aspects and evolution of practice. PLoS One. 2018; 13(12): e0207815. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207815

7. Shi X, Liu H, Xing R, Mei W, Zhang L, Ding L, et al. Effect of intramedullary nail and locking plate in the treatment of proximal humerus fracture: an update systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2019; 14(1): 285. doi: 10.1186/s13018-019-1345-0

8. Monastyrev VV, Vasilyev VYu, Puseva ME, Tsalko AS. Method of surgical treatment of a fracture of the proximal humerus: Patent N 2652573 of the Russian Federation. (In Russ.).

9. Monastyrev VV, Ponomarenko NS, Puseva ME, Evsukova AE. New method of surgical treatment of patients with a fracture of the proximal humerus on the background of critical osteoporosis. Acta biomedica scientifica. 2019; 4(6): 89-94. doi: 10.29413/ABS.2019-4.6.13. (In Russ.)

10. Monastyrev VV, Ponomarenko NS, Mikhaylov IN, Balzhinimaev DB. Diagnosis and treatment of patients with a fracture of the proximal humerus. Siberian Medical Journal (Irkutsk). 2018; 154(3): 66-71. (In Russ.)

11. Barabash AP, Barabash AA, Puseva ME. Method of taking and autpgraft for bone autoplasty: Patent N 2166296 of the Russian Federation. (In Russ.)

12. Hand microsurgery. URL: http://www.xn----etboabbakenyxcauqj7a0r.xn--p1ai/vopros-vracu/dash. (In Russ.)

13. Lipina MM, Lychagin AV, Arkhipov SV, Kalinsky EB, Aliev RI, Yavlieva RKh, et al. Adaptation of the main questionnaires used to assess the condition and function of the shoulder joint in case of joint pain of various etiologies. The Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2018; 4(34): 44-50. (In Russ)