EPIDEMIOLOGY AND LONG-TERM RESULTS OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF THE PROXIMAL HUMERUS FRACTURES IN THE SEMEY CITY: A RETROSPECTIVE STUDY
Introduction. According to foreign literature the proximal humerus fractures account for about 5% of all fractures of the musculoskeletal system and 26% of all fractures of the humerus. The incidence rate is approximately 82 cases per 100,000 people.
Research objective. To study the epidemiology of proximal humerus fractures in the city of Semey, compare various data such as age, gender, type of fracture, treatment method, time before hospitalization and surgery, length of stay in the hospital and analyze the long-term results of surgical treatment.
Mmaterials and methods. 117 patients with various types of proximal humerus fractures, who received inpatient and outpatient treatment at the Semey Emergency Hospital for the period 2019-2020, were retrospectively studied. The international classification of fractures AO/OTA was used to classify the type of fracture. The study of long-term results was carried out 1 year or more after surgical treatment. A special patient questionnaire was developed, and the Constant-Murley scale was used to assess the recovery of the shoulder joint function. Statistical analyze of the obtained results was carried out in the SPSS 20 program, using the nonparametric tests of Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher.
Results. The mean age was 62 years, 73% of all patients were female. Most of the injured people were residents of the city. Type 11A2.2 fractures were the most common (33%), 98% of all injuries were isolated. 82 patients were hospitalized, more than half of them were treated conservatively. Of the surgical methods, fixation with a locking plate was most often used (59%). In the long-term period, the following complications were identified: contracture of the shoulder joint - 26%, aseptic necrosis of the head of the humerus - 5% and neuropathy of the axillary nerve - 1%. The average assessment of the restoration the functions of the shoulder joint according to the Constant-Murley scale was 88 points.
Arman С. Mussabekov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8618-0345
Yersin T. Zhunussov2, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1182-5257
Magzhan S. Zhumakan1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1904-691X
Aidos S. Tlemisov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4239-6627
Ernar N. Toktarov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5166-243X
Talgat G. Dzhunusov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8169-147X
Nurlan A. Bokembaev1, https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4140-1831
Zhaxylyk M. Kassymov1, https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5948-5100
1 NJSC «Semey Medical University», Semey c., Republic of Kazakhstan;
2 International science center of traumatology and orthopaedics, Almaty c., Republic of Kazakhstan.
1. Akshar H. Patel, J. Heath Wilder, Sione A. Ofa, Olivia C. Lee How age and gender influence proximal humerus fracture management in patients older than fifty years // JSES International, 2021 Dec 17.6(2):253-258. doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2021.11.007.
2. Amit Piple, Christian Taylor Smith, David W. Barton, Jonathan J. Carmouche Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Geriatric Population Present an Opportunity to Improve Recognition and Treatment of Osteoporosis // Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery & Rehabilitation, Volume 11: 1-6. DOI: 10.1177/2151459320935103.
3. Beeres F.J.P., Hallensleben N.D.L., Rhemrev S.J., Goslings J.C., Oehme F., Meylaerts S.A.G., et al. Plate fixation of the proximal humerus: an international multicentre comparative study of postoperative complications // Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017. 137(12):1685–92.
4. Bergdahl C., Ekholm C., Wennergren D., Nilsson F., Möller M. Epidemiology and patho-anatomical pattern of 2,011 humeral fractures: Data from the Swedish Fracture Register // BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016. 17(1). p. 320-332.
5. Clinton J., Franta A., Polissar N.L., Neradilek B., Mounce D., Fink H.A., et al. Proximal humeral fracture as a risk factor for subsequent hip fractures // J Bone Jt Surg - Ser A. 2009. 91(3):503–11.
6. Deepak C.D., Ravoof A., Baruah M.J. Functional outcome of displaced proximal humerus fractures managed by proximal humerus interlocking system plate // Int J Res Orthop. 2017. 3(3):583.
7. Dilisio M.F., Nowinski R.J., Hatzidakis A.M., Fehringer E.V. Intramedullary nailing of the proximal humerus: Evolution, technique, and results // J Shoulder Elb Surg [Internet]. 2016. 25(5): e130–8.
8. Doursounian L., Le Sant A., Mauprivez R., Miquel A., Beauthier-Landauer V. Open reduction and internal fixation of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures by intra-focal distraction: observational study of twenty five cases // Int Orthop. 2016. 40(11):2373–82.
9. Feissli S., Audigé L., Steinitz A., Müller A.M., Rikli D. Treatment options for proximal humeral fractures in the older adults and their implication on personal independence // Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020;140(12).
10. Gerard P. Slobogean, Herman Johal, Kelly A. Lefaivre, Norma J. MacIntyre, Sheila Sprague, Slobogean et al. A scoping review of the proximal humerus fracture literature // BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2015. 16:112. DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0564-8.
11. Giorgio Maria Calori, Massimiliano Colomb, Miguel Simon Bucci, Piero Fadigati, Alessandra Ines Maria Colombo Complications in proximal humeral fractures. Injury, August 05, 2016, DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.07.039.
12. Gracitelli M.E.C., Dotta T.A.G., Assunção J.H., Malavolta E.A., Andrade-Silva F.B., Kojima K.E., et al. Intraobserver and interobserver agreement in the classification and treatment of proximal humeral fractures // J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2017. 26(6):1097–102.
13. Jan Dauwe, Gregory Walters, Lukas A. Holzer, Kris Vanhaecht, Stefaan Nijs Failure after proximal humeral fracture osteosynthesis: a one-year analysis of hospital-related healthcare cost // International Orthopaedics. 2020. 44: 1217–1221. doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04577.
14. Karol Ratajczak, Grzegorz Szczesny, Paweł Małdyk. Comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus - principles of the diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation // Ortopedia Traumatologia Rehabilitacja. 2019 Apr 30. 21(2):77-93. doi: 10.5604/01.3001.0013.1544.
15. Launonen A.P., Lepola V., Saranko A., Flinkkilä T., Laitinen M., Mattila V.M. Epidemiology of proximal humerus fractures // Arch Osteoporos. 2015. 10(1):1–5.
16. Reinier B. Beks, Yassine Ochen, Herman Frima, Diederik P., Olivier van der Meijden Operative versus nonoperative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials // Journal of Shoulder and Elbow. Surgery Volume 27, Issue 8, P1526-1534, August 01, 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.03.009.
17. Shi X., Liu H., Xing R., Mei W., Zhang L., Ding L., et al. Effect of intramedullary nail and locking plate in the treatment of proximal humerus fracture: An update systematic review and meta-analysis // J Orthop Surg Res. 2019. 14(1):1–11.
18. Tadvi N.D., Deveshawar R.N., Patel Y.C. Treatment of proximal humerus fracture using proximal humerus locking plating // Int J Res Orthop. 2017. 3(4):670.
19. Valenti P., Zampeli F., Ciais G., Kany J., Katz D. The initial treatment of complex proximal humerus fracture affects the outcome of revision with reverse shoulder arthroplasty // Int Orthop. 2020. 44(7). p. 260-274.
20. Vachtsevanos L., Hayden L., Desai A.S., Dramis A. Management of proximal humerus fractures in adults. 2014. 5(5):685–93.
Number of Views: 111
Category of articles:
Original articles
Bibliography link
Mussabekov A.С., Zhunussov Ye.T., Zhumakan M.S., Tlemisov A.S., Toktarov E.N., Dzhunusov T.G., Bokembaev N.A., Kassymov Zh.M. Epidemiology and long-term results of surgical treatment of the proximal humerus fractures in the Semey city: a retrospective study // Nauka i Zdravookhranenie [Science & Healthcare]. 2022, (Vol.24) 4, pp. 125-132. doi 10.34689/SH.2022.24.4.016Related publications:
ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL AND DEMOGRAPHIC INDICATORS OF PATIENTS WITH PARKINSON'S DISEASE IN THE SOUTHERN REGION OF KAZAKHSTAN
A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DRUG POLICY REGARDING ORPHAN DISEASES IN THE USA, THE EUROPEAN UNION, AND THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN
MUTATIONS IN CARDIAC ION CHANNEL GENES IN KAZAKHSTANI PATIENTS WITH LONG QT SYNDROME
GENETIC FEATURES OF CONGENITAL DYSFUNCTION OF THE ADRENAL CORTEX CAUSED BY 21-HYDROXYLASE DEFICIENCY IN PERSONS OF KAZAKH NATIONALITY
NON-MOTOR SYMPTOMS IN PARKINSON'S DISEASE USING THE EXAMPLE OF AKTOBE PATIENTS