Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 7, Issue 6 | Pages 422 - 429
1 Jun 2018
Acklin YP Zderic I Inzana JA Grechenig S Schwyn R Richards RG Gueorguiev B

Aims

Plating displaced proximal humeral fractures is associated with a high rate of screw perforation. Dynamization of the proximal screws might prevent these complications. The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate a new gliding screw concept for plating proximal humeral fractures biomechanically.

Methods

Eight pairs of three-part humeral fractures were randomly assigned for pairwise instrumentation using either a prototype gliding plate or a standard PHILOS plate, and four pairs were fixed using the gliding plate with bone cement augmentation of its proximal screws. The specimens were cyclically tested under progressively increasing loading until perforation of a screw. Telescoping of a screw, varus tilting and screw migration were recorded using optical motion tracking.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1382 - 1389
1 Oct 2012
Sewell MD Kang SN Al-Hadithy N Higgs DS Bayley I Falworth M Lambert SM

There is little information about the management of peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus after total shoulder replacement (TSR). This is a retrospective review of 22 patients who underwent a revision of their original shoulder replacement for peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus with bone loss and/or loose components. There were 20 women and two men with a mean age of 75 years (61 to 90) and a mean follow-up 42 months (12 to 91): 16 of these had undergone a previous revision TSR. Of the 22 patients, 12 were treated with a long-stemmed humeral component that bypassed the fracture. All their fractures united after a mean of 27 weeks (13 to 94). Eight patients underwent resection of the proximal humerus with endoprosthetic replacement to the level of the fracture. Two patients were managed with a clam-shell prosthesis that retained the original components. The mean Oxford shoulder score (OSS) of the original TSRs before peri-prosthetic fracture was 33 (14 to 48). The mean OSS after revision for fracture was 25 (9 to 31). Kaplan-Meier survival using re-intervention for any reason as the endpoint was 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 68 to 98) and 60% (95% CI 30 to 80) at one and five years, respectively.

There were two revisions for dislocation of the humeral head, one open reduction for modular humeral component dissociation, one internal fixation for nonunion, one trimming of a prominent screw and one re-cementation for aseptic loosening complicated by infection, ultimately requiring excision arthroplasty. Two patients sustained nerve palsies.

Revision TSR after a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture associated with bone loss and/or loose components is a salvage procedure that can provide a stable platform for elbow and hand function. Good rates of union can be achieved using a stem that bypasses the fracture. There is a high rate of complications and function is not as good as with the original replacement.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 1 | Pages 70 - 74
1 Jan 2013
Dattani R Smith CD Patel VR

We investigated the incidence of and risk factors for venous thromboembolism (VTE) following surgery of the shoulder and elbow and assessed the role of thromboprophylaxis in upper limb surgery. All papers describing VTE after shoulder and elbow surgery published in the English language literature before 31 March 2012 were reviewed. A total of 14 papers were available for analysis, most of which were retrospective studies and case series. The incidence of VTE was 0.038% from 92 440 shoulder arthroscopic procedures, 0.52% from 42 261 shoulder replacements, and 0.64% from 4833 procedures for fractures of the proximal humerus (open reduction and internal fixation or hemiarthroplasty). The incidence following replacement of the elbow was 0.26% from 2701 procedures. Diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis and ischaemic heart disease were identified as the major risk factors.

The evidence that exists on thromboprophylaxis is based on level III and IV studies, and we therefore cannot make any recommendations on prophylaxis based on the current evidence. It seems reasonable to adopt a multimodal approach that involves all patients receiving mechanical prophylaxis, with chemical prophylaxis reserved for those who are at high risk for VTE.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:70–4.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 89-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1466 - 1469
1 Nov 2007
Mullett H Levy O Raj D Even T Abraham R Copeland SA

We describe the results of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty using the mark III prosthesis in patients over 80 years of age. End-stage arthritis of the shoulder is a source of significant pain and debilitating functional loss in the elderly. An arthroplasty offers good relief of pain and may allow the patient to maintain independence. The risk-benefit ratio of shoulder replacement may be felt to be too high in an elderly age group, but there is no published evidence to support this theory. We have assessed whether the procedure was as reliable and safe as previously seen in a younger cohort of patients. Between 1993 and 2003, 213 Copeland surface replacement arthroplasty procedures were performed in our unit, of which 29 (13.6%) were undertaken in patients over the age of 80. This group of patients was followed up for a mean of 4.5 years (2.1 to 9.3). Their mean age was 84.3 years (81 to 93), the mean operating time was 40 minutes (30 to 45) and the mean in-patient stay was five days (2 to 21). There were no peri-operative deaths or significant complications. The mean Constant score adjusted for age and gender, improved from 15.1% to 77%. Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty may be performed with minimal morbidity and rapid rehabilitation in the elderly.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 91-B, Issue 1 | Pages 75 - 81
1 Jan 2009
Cil A Veillette CJH Sanchez-Sotelo J Sperling JW Schleck C Cofield RH

Between 1976 and 2004, 38 revision arthroplasties (35 patients) were performed for aseptic loosening of the humeral component. The mean interval from primary arthroplasty to revision was 7.1 years (0.4 to 16.6). A total of 35 shoulders (32 patients) were available for review at a mean follow-up of seven years (2 to 19.3).

Pre-operatively, 34 patients (97%) had moderate or severe pain; at final follow-up, 29 (83%) had no or only mild pain (p < 0.0001). The mean active abduction improved from 88° to 107° (p < 0.01); and the mean external rotation from 37° to 46° (p = 0.27). Excellent or satisfactory results were achieved in 25 patients (71%) according to the modified Neer rating system. Humeral components were cemented in 29, with ingrowth implants used in nine cases. There were 19 of standard length and 17 were longer (two were custom replacements and are not included). Bone grafting was required for defects in 11 humeri. Only two glenoid components were left unrevised. Intra-operative complications included cement extrusion in eight cases, fracture of the shaft of the humerus is two and of the tuberosity in four. There were four re-operations, one for recurrent humeral loosening, with 89% survival free of re-operations at ten years.

Revision surgery for aseptic loosening of the humeral component provides reliable pain relief and modest improvement of movement, although there is a substantial risk of intra-operative complications. Revision to a total shoulder replacement gives better results than to a hemiarthroplasty.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 90-B, Issue 6 | Pages 745 - 750
1 Jun 2008
Millar NL Murrell GAC

We identified ten patients who underwent arthroscopic revision of anterior shoulder stabilisation between 1999 and 2005. Their results were compared with 15 patients, matched for age and gender, who had a primary arthroscopic stabilisation during the same period.

At a mean follow-up of 37 and 36 months, respectively, the scores for pain and shoulder function improved significantly between the pre-operative and follow-up visits in both groups (p = 0.002), with no significant difference between them (p = 0.4). The UCLA and Rowe shoulder scores improved significantly (p = 0.004 and p = 0.002, respectively), with no statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.6). Kaplan-Meier analysis for time to recurrent instability showed no differences between the groups (p = 0.2).

These results suggest that arthroscopic revision anterior shoulder stabilisation is as reliable as primary arthroscopic stabilisation for patients who have had previous open surgery for recurrent anterior instability.