We performed a systematic review of the literature to compare the clinical outcomes of the management of three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus by conservative regimes, internal and external fixations and arthroplasty. We identified 147 reports of comparative trials and case series between 1969 and 1999. We selected only studies dealing exclusively with three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus, with at least 15 patients, treated within 48 h of injury by one of the three modalities studied, in which at least one of the outcomes of interest (pain, range of motion, infection and restoration of anatomy) was described. Also, to be included, studies had to have a follow-up period of at least 6 months, in which a minimum of 85% of patients were followed-up. Twenty four reports met our eligibility criteria. Conservatively managed patients had more pain and a poorer range of motion than those managed by either fixation or arthroplasty. Better restoration of anatomy was delivered in the fixation group. There was no significant difference in the functional range of motion between the arthroplasty and fixation groups, but there were very few studies available to compare infection rates in these two management modalities. The results from the present systematic review suggest that the data from the published literature are inadequate for evidence-based decision making with regards to the treatment of complex proximal humeral fractures.

Complex proximal humeral fractures in adults--a systematic review of management.

MAFFULLI, Nicola
2001

Abstract

We performed a systematic review of the literature to compare the clinical outcomes of the management of three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus by conservative regimes, internal and external fixations and arthroplasty. We identified 147 reports of comparative trials and case series between 1969 and 1999. We selected only studies dealing exclusively with three and four part fractures of the proximal humerus, with at least 15 patients, treated within 48 h of injury by one of the three modalities studied, in which at least one of the outcomes of interest (pain, range of motion, infection and restoration of anatomy) was described. Also, to be included, studies had to have a follow-up period of at least 6 months, in which a minimum of 85% of patients were followed-up. Twenty four reports met our eligibility criteria. Conservatively managed patients had more pain and a poorer range of motion than those managed by either fixation or arthroplasty. Better restoration of anatomy was delivered in the fixation group. There was no significant difference in the functional range of motion between the arthroplasty and fixation groups, but there were very few studies available to compare infection rates in these two management modalities. The results from the present systematic review suggest that the data from the published literature are inadequate for evidence-based decision making with regards to the treatment of complex proximal humeral fractures.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11386/4329053
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact