Proximal Humerus Fractures (PHF) account for 5-6% of all adult fractures and have a bimodal distribution involving young patients with high-energy trauma or, more commonly, older patients with low-energy falls. Whenever possible, particularly with non- or minimally displaced fractures, PHFs can be treated non-operatively. Many recent studies have demonstrated no outcome difference between non-operative treatment and any common operative option. Operative treatment options for PHFs include percutaneous pinning, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), intramedullary nails (IMN), hemiarthroplasty (HA), and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Generally displaced three or four-part fractures are indicated for operative fixation. However, the ProFHER (Proximal Fracture of the Humerus: Evaluation by Randomization) trial demonstrated satisfactory results may be achieved when PHFs are managed non-operatively. This review will focus on the latest evidence and outcomes following non-operative and operative treatment of proximal humerus fractures (PHF).
Diagnostic tests are used to identify the presence or absence of a condition of interest and develop an appropriate treatment plan. They are regulated by government organizations for use in a clinical setting. The accuracy of a new diagnostic test is determined by comparing it to the current reference test standard. The regulatory approval process for a diagnostic test varies according to government regulations based upon the intended purpose of the diagnostic test.
Background The purpose of this retrospective study was to analyze time to fracture union, complications, and outcomes of postoperative periprosthetic humerus fractures after primary shoulder arthroplasty. Methods Retrospective review of patients who sustained a postoperative periprosthetic humerus fracture after primary shoulder arthroplasty at a single institution. Fractures were classified according to the Worland Classification system. Both non-operatively and operatively treated patients were included. The primary study outcomes were time to union and complications. Results There were 46 patients who sustained a postoperative periprosthetic humerus fracture after primary shoulder arthroplasty, 18 were treated non-operatively and 28 were treated operatively. There were seven (25%) patients who underwent surgery after failed non-operative management. There was only one (2.2%) patient who had a nonunion at final follow-up. The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score, Single Assessment Numeral Evaluation, and visual analog scale pain scores were 73.5 ± 22.7, 66.5 ± 23.1, and 2.2 ± 2.4, respectively. Conclusion There was a high rate of union for both non-operatively and operatively treated periprosthetic fractures. However, there was a high rate of cross-over from non-operative to operative treatment and a high complication rate for both cohorts. For properly indicated patients, non-operative and operative treatment can result in satisfactory patient outcomes.
The primary goals of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are to relieve pain, improve range of motion, and restore function. Physical therapy is commonly used to help achieve these goals. Recent evidence has pointed to the success and safety of a purely physician-guided, home-based or internet-based, program versus the traditional therapist guided program. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes of TSA in patients using a web-based, home therapy program.A retrospective review was performed of TSA patients who were given the option of using a web-based, home therapy program. Functional outcomes were collected preoperatively, 6-month, and 12-month post-operative examinations. Physical examination parameters were recorded at preoperative, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month time-points.Forty-seven patients used the web-based, home therapy program and had complete follow-up data at all time intervals. All mean range of motion parameters and functional scores improved significantly from preoperatively to postoperatively. There was one reported complication in a patient who sustained a subscapularis rupture and underwent subsequent open repair at 10 months postoperatively.This study demonstrates successful improvements in range of motion and functional outcomes in a subset of patients who utilized an online therapy program after TSA. Future study will be necessary to directly compare results in patients enrolled in formal, outpatient therapy programs and to determine barriers to utilization of web-based therapy programs.
Management of failed rotator cuff repair may be very difficult, especially in young patients. Various nonmodifiable and modifiable patient factors, including age, tendon quality, rotator cuff tear characteristics, acute or chronic rotator cuff tear, bone quality, tobacco use, and medications, affect rotator cuff repair healing. Surgical variables, such as the technique, timing, tension on the repair, the biomechanical construct, and fixation, as well as the postoperative rehabilitation strategy also affect rotator cuff repair healing. Variable outcomes have been reported in patients who undergo revision rotator cuff repair; however, a systematic surgical approach may increase the likelihood of a successful outcome. Numerous cellular and mechanical biologic augments, including platelet-rich plasma, platelet-rich fibrin matrix, mesenchymal stem cells, and acellular dermal matrix grafts, have been used in rotator cuff repair; however, conflicting or inconclusive outcomes have been reported in patients who undergo revision rotator cuff repair with the use of these augments. A variety of tendon transfer options, including latissimus dorsi, teres major, lower trapezius, pectoralis minor, pectoralis major, combined pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi, and combined latissimus dorsi and teres major, are available for the management of massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. Ultimately, the optimization of surgical techniques and the use of appropriate biologic/tendon transfer techniques, if indicated, is the best method for the management of failed rotator cuff repair.
The fourth generation of humeral components currently are being used in anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty implants have evolved to better re-create anatomy, improve fixation, preserve bone, and facilitate revision surgery. Most of the design changes for shoulder arthroplasty implants have centered on the humeral stem, with a transition to shorter, metaphyseal humeral stems. Many of these humeral component design changes may be beneficial; however, long-term studies are necessary to determine if the results of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty with the use of newer humeral components can match those of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty with the use of older humeral components.
ABSTRACT Background Residency program location may be an important factor for orthopedic surgery residency applicants. More than half of residents locate their practice near the site of their training, and surgical specialties (eg, otolaryngology, plastic surgery, and general surgery) have shown geographic patterns in their residency matches. Objective We analyzed geographic trends in the orthopedic surgery Match. Methods Hometown, undergraduate institution, and medical school “preresidency locations” of all allopathic, nonmilitary, orthopedic surgery residents were recorded from program websites for the 2015–2016 academic year. Program and preresidency locations were coded according to state and US census division. Statistical analysis was used to investigate associations between residency program locations and preresidency locations. Results Of 2662 residents in the study, 1220 of 2614 (47%), 536 of 1329 (40%), and 308 of 744 (41%) matched into the same division as their medical school, undergraduate institution, and hometown, respectively. There were significant differences among divisions (P < .001). Also, 817 of 2662 (31%), 319 of 1329 (24%), and 200 of 770 (26%) residents matched in the same state as their medical school, undergraduate institution, and hometown, respectively, with significant differences between states for medical school (P < .0001) and undergraduate institution (P < .0001), but not hometown (P = .22). Overall, 21% of residents (538 of 2612) matched at the program affiliated with their medical school. Conclusions There is an association among hometown, undergraduate institution, and medical school for the training program location in which orthopedic surgery residents match, with variability in locations matched at state and census division levels.
