PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “HUMERUS”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2005

Internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures using the locking proximal humerus plate.

OBJECTIVE: Stable fixation of unstable proximal humerus fractures until bony consolidation. Early mobilization of the shoulder and early active rehabilitation program to ensure a good functional outcome and a good restoration of the activities of daily living. INDICATIONS: Unstable two-, three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus (classified according to the AO classification as: 11-A2, A3, B1, B2, B3, C1, C2, C3). Nonunions of the proximal humerus, especially at the neck. Pathologic fractures of the proximal humerus. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Comminuted humeral head fractures in old patients, which cannot be reconstructed adequately. Proximal humerus fractures in the immature patient. Local infection after previous surgery. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Deltopectoral approach. Blunt mobilization of the deltoid muscle. Suture loops through the supraspinatus tendon, the infraspinatus tendon, and the subscapularis tendon close to their bony insertion. Careful indirect reduction of the fracture fragments without further damage to their blood supply. Correct positioning of the LPHP (Locking Proximal Humerus Plate) on the lateral side of the humerus, approximately 5 mm below the tip of the greater tuberosity. Indirect approximation of the subcapital fracture component to the plate, by tightening a standard 3.5-mm cortical bone screw inserted into the first hole distal to the metaphyseal fracture line. Temporary fixation of the plate with 1.8-mm Kirschner wires. Fixed-angle fixation of the plate to the bone, using locking screws. Additional stabilization of the tuberosities to the plate with suture loops. RESULTS: Between January 1, 1997 and April 30, 2002, 64 patients with acute fractures of the proximal humerus were treated with fixed-angle plating at the UKH Graz. 36 patients meeting the inclusion criteria (that is primary operative stabilization within 14 days after trauma in a standardized way and minimal follow-up period of 12 months) were assessed 31 months after surgery on average, using the Constant Score and the DASH Score. The mean age of the 22 women and 14 men was 57.5 years (21-78 years). According to the AO classification eight fractures were classified as 11-A3, one fracture as B1, five fractures as B2, three fractures as B3, one fracture as C1, 16 fractures as C2, and two fractures as C3. A mean Constant Score of 62.6 points and an age-related Constant Score of 80.7% on average, as well as a DASH Score of 18.0 points were obtained, constituting a satisfactory result in three quarters of all patients. Complications observed were two humeral head necroses, one partial necrosis after a head-splitting fracture with nevertheless good clinical result, and a deep infection in two cases. Breakage of the plate was seen in one patient with an A3.3 fracture without medial buttress; no further surgery was necessary; the fracture healed after a short period of immobilization.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

[Angle- and rotation-stable internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures with the humerus fixator plate. Early clinical experience with a newly developed implant].

INTRODUCTION: The Humerus Fixator Plate is presented as a new implant for angle- and rotation-stable internal fixation for the operative treatment of proximal humerus fractures at the surgical neck. METHODS: In an ongoing two-centre study, 47 patients were treated with the new implant. To date, 31 patients had clinical and radiological postoperative follow-up examinations with a mean interval of 10 months (range: 6-14 months). RESULTS: In 46 patients (97.9%), complete angle and rotational stability was achieved without limiting the range of motion or requiring immobilization. Good pain relief was obtained in 43 patients (91.5 %), and 3 patients (6.4%) showed moderate pain relief following surgery. There was one implant failure. Utilizing the Constant-Raw score (without any correction factors), a mean result of 82.8 points (range: 46-100 points) was ascertained. The majority of the patients (87.1%) achieved "excellent" or "good" clinical results. X-ray analysis revealed no non-union nor humerus head necrosis. In 4 cases (12.9%), protrusion of a humerus head screw was observed which mandated removal of the implant. CONCLUSION: The first clinical investigations of the novel Humerus Fixator Plate are encouraging and provide essential advances in the treatment of unstable proximal humerus fractures.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Comparison of the use of the humerus intramedullary nail and dynamic compression plate for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. A randomised controlled study.

The aim of this study was to compare the results of the humerus intramedullary nail (IMN) and dynamic compression plate (DCP) for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus. Forty-seven patients with diaphyseal fracture of the shaft of the humerus were randomised prospectively and treated by open reduction and internal fixation with IMN or DCP. The criteria for inclusion were grade 1 or 2a compound fractures, polytrauma, early failure of conservative treatment and unstable fractures. The patients with pathological fractures, grade 3 open fractures, refractures and old neglected fractures of the humerus were excluded from the study. Twenty-three patients underwent internal fixation by IMN and 24 by DCP. Reamed antegrade nailing was done in all cases. DCP was done through an anterolateral or posterior approach. The outcome was assessed in terms of the union time, union rate, functional outcome and the incidence of complications. Functional outcome was assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons' Score (ASES). On comparing the results by independent samples t test, there was no significant difference in ASES scores between the two groups (P>0.05). The average union time was found to be significantly lower for IMN as compared to DCP (P<0.05). The union rate was found to be similar in both groups. Complications such as infection were found to be higher with DCP as compared to IMN, while shortening of the arm (1.5-4 cm) and restriction of shoulder movements due to impingement by the nail were found to be higher with IMN as compared to DCP. However, this improved in all patients following the removal of the nail once the fracture had healed. This study proves that IMN can be considered a better surgical option for the management of diaphyseal fractures of the humerus as it offers a short union time and lower incidence of serious complications like infection. However, there appears to be no difference between the two groups in terms of the rate of union and functional outcome.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Complications and timing of follow-up after closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of supracondylar humerus fractures: follow-up after percutaneous pinning of supracondylar humerus fractures.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the need for clinical evaluation with radiographs within 10 days of closed reduction and percutaneous pinning for the treatment of displaced supracondylar humerus fractures. Between May 1 and December 31, 2001, the authors evaluated the complications with closed reduction and percutaneous pinning of 104 displaced supracondylar humerus fractures. Fifty-two of the patients had the initial follow-up examination with radiographs 10 days or less after pinning; the other 52 patients had the initial follow-up examination with radiographs either after 10 days or on the day of pin removal. The overall complication rate for the series was 7.7% (8/104). All eight complications were in type III fractures. The early follow-up group had six complications; the late follow-up group had two complications. Baumann's angle, lateral humerocapitellar angle, and lateral rotational percentage were not significantly different between the two groups. The only variable tested that was associated with a complication was pin configuration. No association between late follow-up and complications was identified. The authors conclude that clinical and radiographic evaluation of routine displaced supracondylar humerus fractures requiring closed reduction and percutaneous pinning may be safely delayed until pin removal.

Bone Nails↗
PubMed2002

[Inferior subluxation of humerus after surgery of fractures of proximal humerus].

Posttraumatic inferior subluxation of the humerus can be a possible cause of nerve injury and is therefore an alarming symptom. Etiology and frequency of subluxation after surgery of fractures of proximal humerus in group of 53 patients, including 4 cases of nerve injuries were studied. X-rays performed during treatment of this patients were analyzed. We confirmed high rate (41.5%) of this subluxation in our patients, 4 times more often in comminuted fractures, as result of deltoid atony, impaction of bony fragments and distention of the joint by hematoma. Surgical trauma and heavy cast immobilization were additional factors. We remarked after bone plating subluxation more frequent (62.5-75%) and duration longer than after nailing (13.6-34%). We concluded subluxation is secondary to many factors, needs meticulous evaluation for excluding injury of nerves, and for avoiding surgical trauma and cast immobilization should be minimized.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus with the PlantTan Humerus Fixator Plate: early experience with a new implant.

The majority of fractures of the proximal humerus can be managed nonoperatively. However, displaced fractures generally require operative repair, and in the young patient with good bone quality, the results are usually satisfactory. In contrast, the osteoporosis found in the elderly patient makes internal fixation problematic and frequently contributes to failure of fixation and poor results. We report our early experience with a new plate that locks two humeral head cancellous screws to the plate. In 3 of 7 patients, all under 65 years of age, the results were good. However, in the remaining 4 patients, all over the age of 75 years, there was a 100% failure rate, with screw penetration of the head in 3 patients and secondary displacement of the fracture at 7 days postoperatively in another. We conclude that this implant is unsatisfactory for patients with osteopenic bone in the humeral head.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

[Intramedullary fixation of humerus shaft fractures. An analysis of complications of 2 implants with special reference to outcome after management with the unreamed humerus interlocking nail].

INTRODUCTION: Operative treatment of humeral shaft fractures has gained a new impetus with the development of intramedullary interlocking systems for the humerus. Because of the anatomical structure of the humeral marrow cavity, a regular jamming of nail into bone is not to be expected, so that the stability of these systems needs to be achieved through an interlocking mechanism. Among the commercially available interlocking nailing systems the unreamed humeral nail (UHN) and the Seidel-nail (SHN) can be regarded as the standard implants. DESIGN: In a retrospective study comparing two groups of patients, each treated with one of the two systems, problems and advantages, as well as disadvantages were analyzed, and the complications inherent in the systems examined. PATIENTS: Between 1988-1992, 47 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with a Seidel interlocking nail: 25 acute and 18 pathological fractures as well as 4 non-unions (Group 1). Between 1997-1999, 34 patients with humeral shaft fractures were treated with the unreamed humeral nail (UHN). A total of thirty-five (n = 35) nailings (30 acute and 4 pathological fractures, as well as one re-osteosynthesis after emergence of a non-union) were carried out. Three primary palsies of the radial nerve ensued: two with loss of sensitivity, and one complete paralysis (Group 2). METHODS: Based on pre- and postoperative X-rays and follow-up examinations, the healing process and complications inherent in each of the systems were evaluated. RESULTS: Intra-operative complications of Seidel-nailing (Group 1) were seen in 5 cases: failure of the proximal target device in 2 (4.2%) cases; the breaking of the long screwdriver during the distal locking in 1 (2.1%) case; blockade of nail-insertion due to the spreading distal lamellas in 1 (2.1%) case; in 1 (2.1%) case it was impossible to find the imbus of the distal locking screw with the screwdriver. Incorrect surgical technique resulting in further fragmentation of the shaft required revisions in 2 (4.2%) cases. In 3 cases (6.4%), the insertion of the nail was insufficient, so that an impingement resulted. In 12 cases, postoperative complications after Seidel-nailing resulted: 3 (6.4%) radial nerve palsies, of which 2 (4.2%) were transitory; 3 (6.4%) infections; in 3 (6.4%) cases, loosening of the locking bolt inserted in the frontal plane; in 1 (2.1%) case, loosening of the distal spreading screw. The system failed in treating 2 (of 4) non-unions, whereas successful ossification and repair occurred in all acute fractures. In Group 2 (UHN) the acute fractures of 33 cases healed without complications. Intra-operative complications of the unreamed nail: in 2 cases (5.6%), failure of the target devices resulted in malpositoning of interlocking screws. The following intra-operative complications of the retrograde technique were observed: burst of a fragment at the insertion site in 1 case (2.8%); intra-articular positioning of the most proximal interlocking screw in another case (2.8%). Postoperative complications of the unreamed nail: breaking of a proximal and a distal interlocking screw in 1 case (2.8%), which had no influence on the healing progress. In 1 case (2.8%) both proximal interlocking screws came loose and a non-union ensued. After re-osteosynthesis with the same technique, bony repair was achieved. CONCLUSION: The possibilities of operative methods in treatment of humeral shaft fractures are enhanced by intramedullary interlocking systems. Comparing with the Seidel nail, the unreamed humeral nail (UHN) has two advantages: it can be inserted anterogradely as well as retrogradely, and it provides the possibility of compressing the fracture, resulting in a high rotational stability. Due to these results, the application of the UHN is recommended.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

[Retrograde nailing of humerus shaft fractures with the unreamed humerus nail. An international multicenter study].

Combined with the new unreamed humeral nail (UHN) (Synthes), the retrograde approach to the endomedullary canal of the humeral shaft promises careful reduction and fixation of humeral shaft fractures. This prospective multicenter study reports and analyses 102 retrograde nailings with the UHN and their operative procedures. Seven patients with pathological fractures have died meanwhile, but 75 patients could be followed up until bone healing. Seventy-three fresh humeral shaft fractures, 12 pseudarthrosis, 3 refractures and 14 pathological fractures have been treated with the UHN. In 98 cases (96.1%) the surgeon estimated fracture stability well enough to initiate immediate postoperative elbow and shoulder mobilization. The difficulties involved with free-hand interlocking proximally at the nail tip in 5.9%, fissure or avulsion at the insertion point in 3.9% and radial nerve palsy also in 3.9% of the cases were the most important intraoperative complications. In all 75 patients followed up, bone healing occurred, but five fractures (6.7%) needed more than 8 months connected with a second operative procedure. In one case spongious bone transplantation and new locking bolts had been performed. In three cases a special compression device has been used, whereas in one case also a new nail and in the second spongious bone transplantation had been added. In the fifth case plate osteosynthesis had been performed. At the end of treatment 89.4% of the patients had excellent shoulder function and 88.0% excellent elbow function. Once the indication for surgery is established, the UHN can be considered a reliable and safe implant for stabilizing humeral shaft fractures.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Caveats for the use of humerus length in the prediction of fetal Down syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability and reproducibility of fetal humerus length in the diagnosis of trisomy 21. METHODS: Cohort study inclusive of 22 trisomy 21 fetuses, who underwent ultrasonographic examination between 14 and 22 weeks' gestation, and 457 euploid controls. Regression analysis was performed for humerus length as function of biparietal diameter. Based on the generated regression equation in euploid fetuses, expected values of humerus length for a given biparietal diameter were calculated. The ratios of observed to expected (O/E) humerus length values were compared between euploid and trisomy 21 fetuses using Student's t test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to detect optimal thresholds of O/E humerus length for diagnosis of trisomy 21. In addition, a MEDLINE search was conducted for articles published on humerus length as predictor of trisomy 21. RESULTS: No differences were present between the regression lines of trisomy 21 and euploid fetuses (mean +/- standard deviation O/E humerus length in euploid and aneuploid fetuses: 1.00 +/- 0.10 vs. 0.97 +/- 0.11, p = 0.21). The optimal threshold O/E humerus length <0.88 identified by ROC curve analysis had a sensitivity of 18% and a false-positive rate of 9% for the diagnosis of trisomy 21. From a review of the evidence provided by the 17 published series on humerus length as predictor of Down syndrome, the following caveats emerge: (1) with a median false-positive rate of 5% (range 1-12%), the median sensitivity of humerus length was only 28% (range 15-64%); (2) differences were present among centers in the regression lines of euploid fetuses and in the optimal diagnostic thresholds of humerus length, suggesting inter-center variability, and (3) most populations studied were at high genetic risk for trisomy 21, hence the diagnostic ability of humerus length in low risk populations has not been tested. CONCLUSIONS: The ability of humerus length to predict trisomy 21 is inconsistent. Only institutions with locally generated regression equations and documented predictive ability of this marker should utilize humerus length as a screening test for trisomy 21, alone or incorporated into diagnostic algorithms with serum or other sonographic markers of trisomy 21. The diagnostic ability of humerus length in low risk populations is currently unknown.

Adult↗