Aims. The aim of this study was to explore why some calcar screws are malpositioned when a proximal humeral fracture is treated by internal fixation with a locking plate, and to identify risk factors for this phenomenon. Some suggestions can be made of ways to avoid this error. Methods. We retrospectively identified all proximal humeral fractures treated in our institution between October 2016 and October 2018 using the hospital information system. The patients’ medical and radiological data were collected, and we divided potential risk factors into two groups: preoperative factors and intraoperative factors. Preoperative factors included age, sex, height, weight, body mass index, proximal humeral bone mineral density, type of fracture, the condition of the medial hinge, and medial metaphyseal head extension. Intraoperative factors included the grade of surgeon, neck-shaft angle after reduction, humeral head height, restoration of medial support, and quality of reduction. Adjusted binary logistic regression and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify pre- and intraoperative risk factors. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the multivariable model. Results. Data from 203 patients (63 males and 140 females) with a mean age of 62 years (22 to 89) were analyzed. In 49 fractures, the calcar screw was considered to be malpositioned; in 154 it was in the optimal position. The rate of malpositioning was therefore 24% (49/203). No preoperative risk factor was found for malpositioning of the calcar screws. Only the neck-shaft angle was found to be related to the risk of screw malpositioning in a multivariate model (with an AUC of 0.72). For the fractures in which the neck-shaft angle was reduced to between 130° and 150°, 91% (133/46) of calcar screws were in the optimal position. Conclusion. The neck-shaft angle is the key factor for the appropriate positioning of calcar screws when treating a proximal humeral fracture with a locking plate. We recommend reducing the angle to between 130° and 150°. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1629–1635

Most proximal humeral fractures are stable injuries of the ageing population, and can be successfully treated non-operatively. The management of the smaller number of more complex displaced fractures is more controversial and new fixation techniques have greatly increased the range of fractures that may benefit from surgery.

This article explores current concepts in the classification and clinical aspects of these injuries, reviewing the indications, innovations and outcomes for the most common methods of treatment.

We treated 47 patients with a mean age of 57 years (22 to 88) who had a proximal humeral fracture in which there was a severe varus deformity, using a standard operative protocol of anatomical reduction, fixation with a locking plate and supplementation by structural allografts in unstable fractures. The functional and radiological outcomes were reviewed.

At two years after operation the median Constant score was 86 points and the median Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score 17 points. Seven of the patients underwent further surgery, two for failure of fixation, three for dysfunction of the rotator cuff, and two for shoulder stiffness. The two cases of failure of fixation were attributable to violation of the operative protocol. In the 46 patients who retained their humeral head, all the fractures healed within the first year, with no sign of collapse or narrowing of the joint space. Longer follow-up will be required to confirm whether these initially satisfactory results are maintained.