• A Mallick, M Hearth, S Singh, and R Pandey.
• Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, Leicester Royal Infirmary, University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom. amallickus@yahoo.com
• J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2008 Dec 1;16(3):285-9.

PurposeTo report the outcomes of modified Rush pin fixation for proximal humeral fractures.Methods42 men and 20 women aged 19 to 94 (mean, 64) years with 2- or 3-part proximal humeral fractures underwent reduction and fixation using the modified Rush pin technique. 11 patients died from reasons unrelated to the surgery.ResultsOf 40 (out of 51) patients completing a subjective functional assessment using an Oxford Shoulder Questionnaire, 28 (70%) had 2-part and 10 (25%) had 3-part displaced fractures, and the remaining 2 (5%) had fracture-dislocations (one being 2-part and one 3-part). 25 (63%) patients were very satisfied (including one with a 3-part fracture after 6 months of rehabilitation), 7 (17%) were moderately satisfied, and 8 (20%) were not satisfied. There were 8 complications, including pin cut-out from the proximal fragment (n=2), proximal pin migration (n=2), distal pin migration (n=1), cortical perforation during surgery (n=1), mild ulnar nerve symptoms (n=1). No patients had non-union, myositis ossificans, avascular necrosis of the humeral head, or axillary nerve injury.ConclusionThe modified Rush pin fixation minimises tissue dissection; the implants are cheap and readily available; and the technical expertise is easily learnt. This technique is a suitable alternative of fixing proximal humeral fractures, especially in the elderly.

27 keywords...

hide…