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.
This paper reviews the current literature concerning the main clinical factors which can impair the healing of fractures and makes recommendations on avoiding or minimising these in order to optimise the outcome for patients. The clinical implications are described.
High energy fractures of the pelvis are a challenging problem both in the immediate post-injury phase and later when definitive fixation is undertaken. No single management algorithm can be applied because of associated injuries and the wide variety of trauma systems that have evolved around the world. Initial management is aimed at saving life and this is most likely to be achieved with an approach that seeks to identify and treat life-threatening injuries in order of priority. Early mortality after a pelvic fracture is most commonly due to major haemorrhage or catastrophic brain injury. In this article we review the role of pelvic binders, angiographic embolisation, pelvic packing, early internal fixation and blood transfusion with regard to controlling haemorrhage. Definitive fixation seeks to prevent deformity and reduce complications. We believe this should be undertaken by specialist surgeons in a hospital resourced, equipped and staffed to manage the whole spectrum of major trauma. We describe the most common modes of internal fixation by injury type and review the factors that influence delayed mortality, adverse functional outcome, sexual dysfunction and venous thromboembolism.
The survivorship of contemporary resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip using metal-on-metal bearings is better than that of first generation designs, but short-term failures still occur. The most common reasons for failure are fracture of the femoral neck, loosening of the component, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, reaction to metal debris and malpositioning of the component. In 2008 the Australian National Joint Registry reported an inverse relationship between the size of the head component and the risk of revision in resurfacing hip arthroplasty. Hips with a femoral component size of ≤ 44 mm have a fivefold increased risk of revision than those with femoral components of ≥ 55 mm irrespective of gender. We have reviewed the literature to explore this observation and to identify possible reasons including the design of the implant, loading of the femoral neck, the orientation of the component, the production of wear debris and the effects of metal ions, penetration of cement and vascularity of the femoral head. Our conclusion is that although multifactorial, the most important contributors to failure in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip are likely to be the design and geometry of the component and the orientation of the acetabular component.
The sternoclavicular joint is vulnerable to the same disease processes as other synovial joints, the most common of which are instability from injury, osteoarthritis, infection and rheumatoid disease. Patients may also present with other conditions, which are unique to the joint, or are manifestations of a systemic disease process. The surgeon should be aware of these possibilities when assessing a patient with a painful, swollen sternoclavicular joint.
The literature on fracture repair has been reviewed. The traditional concepts of delayed and nonunion have been examined in terms of the phased and balanced anabolic and catabolic responses in bone repair. The role of medical manipulation of these inter-related responses in the fracture healing have been considered.
