• M H Hessmann and P M Rommens.
• Klinik und Poliklinik für Unfallchirurgie, Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität, Mainz. Hessmann@unfall.klinik.uni-mainz.de
• Chirurg. 2001 Nov 1;72(11):1235-45.

AbstractAlthough proximal humeral fractures are common injuries, there is no generally accepted strategy as to how unstable and displaced two- to four-part fractures should be managed. Surgical therapy is in a conflicting situation between the requirement for anatomical fracture reduction and stable fixation, on the one hand, and the necessity for minimal intraoperative damage to the soft tissue and arterial vascularization of the humeral head in order to avoid avascular necrosis on the other. Whereas minimally invasive procedures using closed or percutaneous reduction and fixation techniques are advantageous for protection of the arterial blood supply of the proximal humerus, plate fixation provides superior fixation stability. Plate fixation seems to be associated with a reduced risk of avascular necrosis when indirect reduction techniques are used. Poor results in the operative management of humeral head fractures are often seen in association with malunion. There is therefore a tendency towards the use of implants with angular stability in order to reduce the risk for secondary loss of reduction during functional after treatment. Innovative new plates and intramedullary nails that provide superior stability of fixation of the humeral head fragment have been actually introduced into clinical practice. Together with the specific patient and fracture characteristics, the final result of operative management, however, remains mainly related to the knowledge and operative skills of the trauma or orthopaedic surgeon who deals with these proximal humeral fractures.

17 keywords...

hide…