» Articles » PMID: 15069130

Periprosthetic Humeral Fractures After Shoulder Arthroplasty

Overview
Date 2004 Apr 8
PMID 15069130
Citations 59
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Currently, there is little information concerning periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. Therefore, we reviewed our experience with these fractures to determine the results of treatment, the risk factors for periprosthetic fracture, and the rates of reoperation.

Methods: Between 1976 and 2001, nineteen postoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures occurred among 3091 patients who had undergone shoulder arthroplasty at our institution. Sixteen patients had a complete series of radiographs and were included in this study. The average time from the arthroplasty to the fracture was forty-nine months. Seven patients had severe osteopenia. Twelve fractures occurred at the tip of the prosthesis; of these, six extended proximally (type-A fractures) and six did not (type-B fractures). Three fractures occurred distal to the implant and extended into the distal humeral metaphysis (type-C fractures). One fracture occurred in the proximal metadiaphyseal region because of osteolysis.

Results: Six fractures healed after an average of 180 days of nonoperative treatment. Five fractures were treated operatively after an average of 123 days of unsuccessful nonoperative treatment. The remaining five fractures had immediate operative treatment. All sixteen fractures healed. One patient required multiple operations over a period of three years before union was achieved. With the exclusion of this patient and one other patient who received a custom prosthesis, the average time between the first operative procedure and union was 278 days.

Conclusions: Our data do not clearly indicate the need for operative treatment of type-A fractures unless the humeral component is loose. A trial of nonoperative treatment may be considered for well-aligned type-B fractures that are associated with a well-fixed humeral component; however, operative intervention should be considered for type-B fractures that have not progressed toward union by three months. If the component is well fixed, open reduction and internal fixation may be performed. If the component is loose, revision with a long-stem component is recommended. For type-C fractures, a trial of nonoperative treatment is recommended.

Citing Articles

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Baseplate Stability Is Affected by Bone Density and the Type and Amount of Augmentation.

Ritter D, Raiss P, Denard P, Werner B, Kistler M, Lesnicar C Bioengineering (Basel). 2025; 12(1).

PMID: 39851316 PMC: 11760445. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering12010042.


Management of periprosthetic humerus fractures after shoulder arthroplasty.

Cox R, Mandava N, Vaughan A, Ramsey M, Getz C, Namdari S Shoulder Elbow. 2024; :17585732241239952.

PMID: 39552676 PMC: 11562340. DOI: 10.1177/17585732241239952.


Surgical fixation of periprosthetic humeral shaft fracture about a short-stem anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with a proximal humeral locking plate: surgical technique and report of 3 cases.

Santoro A, DeBernardis D, Chen R, Hendy B, Lazarus M JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2024; 4(3):573-577.

PMID: 39157256 PMC: 11329050. DOI: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2023.07.004.


Challenges and Outcomes in the Management of Periprosthetic Humeral Fractures: A Retrospective Study and Review of Current Approaches.

Abaydi A, Kadi M, Radi J, Lahrach K, Boutayb F Cureus. 2024; 16(6):e62534.

PMID: 38887746 PMC: 11182142. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.62534.


Periprosthetic proximal humerus fractures require an individualized treatment approach-results of a multicenter retrospective study.

Boesmueller S, Lorenz G, Kinsky R, Schallmayer D, Fialka C, Mittermayr R Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2024; 50(4):1921-1928.

PMID: 38805038 DOI: 10.1007/s00068-024-02553-4.