Cargando…
Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation?
INTRODUCTION: Reconstruction of proximal humerus fracture continues to represent a challenge, especially in severe osteopenia. However, there still is a lack of consensus and clear indication on use of allograft augmentation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate outcome after osteosynthesis wit...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7145012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32271792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230789 |
_version_ | 1783519926140534784 |
---|---|
author | Halvachizadeh, Sascha Berk, Till Rauer, Thomas Hierholzer, Christian Pfeifer, Roman Pape, Hans-Christoph Allemann, Florin |
author_facet | Halvachizadeh, Sascha Berk, Till Rauer, Thomas Hierholzer, Christian Pfeifer, Roman Pape, Hans-Christoph Allemann, Florin |
author_sort | Halvachizadeh, Sascha |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Reconstruction of proximal humerus fracture continues to represent a challenge, especially in severe osteopenia. However, there still is a lack of consensus and clear indication on use of allograft augmentation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate outcome after osteosynthesis with and without allograft augmentation. It focuses on bone density results obtained by DEXA as potential examination that might help decision-making. METHODS: This study included patients aged 65 years and older that were treated at one Level 1 trauma center between 2007 and 2018. Inclusion criteria: Proximal humerus fracture treated with or without allograft, conclusive data-sets. Exclusion criteria: prior surgical treatment of the proximal humerus, open fracture with bone loss, neurological damage. Patients were stratified according to the use of allograft augmentation in two groups: Group NA (no allograft augmented PHILOS) and Group A (PHILOS with allograft augmentation). Comorbidity was assessed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Fractures were graded according to the classification by Neer. Radiographic union was analyzed at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and at year follow up. Complications include surgical site infection, implant failure, humeral head necrosis, or delayed union. Allograft was used in cases of 1inch/3cm(3) bone-loss or an egg-shell situation, where the patient refused arthroplasty. RESULTS: This study included 167 patients, with 143 (85%) in the Group NA, and 24 (15%) in the Group A. There were no significant differences in age, gender, injury distribution, and distribution of Neer classification or CCI. Patients in Group A had significantly lower T-scores preoperatively (-2.87 ± 1.08 versus -0.9 ± 2.12, p = 0.003). No difference occurred in any of the complications. At one-year follow-up, the range of motion was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with allograft augmentation and severe osteopenia, similar clinical and radiological results were obtained when compared with patients with better preoperative bone density scores (T-scores, DEXA). In view of a lack of guidelines indicating the indication for the use of allograft, this difference may be worth further study. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7145012 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-71450122020-04-14 Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? Halvachizadeh, Sascha Berk, Till Rauer, Thomas Hierholzer, Christian Pfeifer, Roman Pape, Hans-Christoph Allemann, Florin PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: Reconstruction of proximal humerus fracture continues to represent a challenge, especially in severe osteopenia. However, there still is a lack of consensus and clear indication on use of allograft augmentation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate outcome after osteosynthesis with and without allograft augmentation. It focuses on bone density results obtained by DEXA as potential examination that might help decision-making. METHODS: This study included patients aged 65 years and older that were treated at one Level 1 trauma center between 2007 and 2018. Inclusion criteria: Proximal humerus fracture treated with or without allograft, conclusive data-sets. Exclusion criteria: prior surgical treatment of the proximal humerus, open fracture with bone loss, neurological damage. Patients were stratified according to the use of allograft augmentation in two groups: Group NA (no allograft augmented PHILOS) and Group A (PHILOS with allograft augmentation). Comorbidity was assessed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Fractures were graded according to the classification by Neer. Radiographic union was analyzed at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and at year follow up. Complications include surgical site infection, implant failure, humeral head necrosis, or delayed union. Allograft was used in cases of 1inch/3cm(3) bone-loss or an egg-shell situation, where the patient refused arthroplasty. RESULTS: This study included 167 patients, with 143 (85%) in the Group NA, and 24 (15%) in the Group A. There were no significant differences in age, gender, injury distribution, and distribution of Neer classification or CCI. Patients in Group A had significantly lower T-scores preoperatively (-2.87 ± 1.08 versus -0.9 ± 2.12, p = 0.003). No difference occurred in any of the complications. At one-year follow-up, the range of motion was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with allograft augmentation and severe osteopenia, similar clinical and radiological results were obtained when compared with patients with better preoperative bone density scores (T-scores, DEXA). In view of a lack of guidelines indicating the indication for the use of allograft, this difference may be worth further study. Public Library of Science 2020-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC7145012/ /pubmed/32271792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230789 Text en © 2020 Halvachizadeh et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Halvachizadeh, Sascha Berk, Till Rauer, Thomas Hierholzer, Christian Pfeifer, Roman Pape, Hans-Christoph Allemann, Florin Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title | Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title_full | Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title_fullStr | Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title_full_unstemmed | Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title_short | Treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - Can pathological DEXA results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
title_sort | treatment of proximal humerus fractures in geriatric patients - can pathological dexa results help to guide the indication for allograft augmentation? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7145012/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32271792 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0230789 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT halvachizadehsascha treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT berktill treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT rauerthomas treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT hierholzerchristian treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT pfeiferroman treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT papehanschristoph treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation AT allemannflorin treatmentofproximalhumerusfracturesingeriatricpatientscanpathologicaldexaresultshelptoguidetheindicationforallograftaugmentation |