We evaluated the biomechanical properties of two different methods of fixation for unstable fractures of the proximal humerus. Biomechanical testing of the two groups, locking plate alone (LP), and locking plate with a fibular strut graft (LPSG), was performed using seven pairs of human cadaveric humeri. Cyclical loads between 10 N and 80 N at 5 Hz were applied for 1 000 000 cycles. Immediately after cycling, an increasing axial load was applied at a rate of displacement of 5 mm/min. The displacement of the construct, maximum failure load, stiffness and mode of failure were compared.

The displacement was significantly less in the LPSG group than in the LP group (p = 0.031). All maximum failure loads and measures of stiffness in the LPSG group were significantly higher than those in the LP group (p = 0.024 and p = 0.035, respectively). In the LP group, varus collapse and plate bending were seen. In the LPSG group, the humeral head cut out and the fibular strut grafts fractured. No broken plates or screws were seen in either group.

We conclude that strut graft augmentation significantly increases both the maximum failure load and the initial stiffness of this construct compared with a locking plate alone.

We retrospectively reviewed 11 consecutive patients with an infected reverse shoulder prosthesis. Patients were assessed clinically and radiologically, and standard laboratory tests were carried out. Peroperative samples showed Propionbacterium acnes in seven, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in five, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in one and Escherichia coli in one. Two multibacterial and nine monobacterial infections were seen. Post-operatively, patients were treated with intravenous cefazolin for at least three days and in all antibiotic therapy was given for at least three months. Severe pain (3 of 11) or severe limitation of function (3 of 11) are not necessarily seen. A fistula was present in eight, but function was not affected. All but one patient were considered free of infection after one-stage revision at a median follow-up of 24 months, and without antibiotic treatment for a minimum of six months. One patient had a persistent infection despite a second staged revision, but is now free of infection with a spacer. Complications included posterior dislocation in one, haematoma in one and a clavicular fracture in one. At the most recent follow-up the median post-operative Constant-Murley score was 55, 6% adjusted for age, gender and dominance.

A one-stage revision arthroplasty reduces the cost and duration of treatment. It is reliable in eradicating infection and good functional outcomes can be achieved.