切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2018, Vol. 06 ›› Issue (03) : 191 -198. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2018.03.006

所属专题: 文献

论著

MIPPO技术联合PHILOS治疗Neer 2部分肱骨近端骨折的疗效分析
李一平1, 向明1,(), 陈杭1, 胡晓川1   
  1. 1. 610041 成都,四川省骨科医院上肢科
  • 收稿日期:2018-03-16 出版日期:2018-08-05
  • 通信作者: 向明
  • 基金资助:
    四川省中医药科学技术研究专项(2016C040)

Efficacy analysis of MIPPO technique combined with PHILOS internal fixation for treatment of Neer 2-part proximal humeral fractures

Yiping Li1, Ming Xiang1,(), Hang Chen1, Xiaochuan Hu1   

  1. 1. Department of Upper Limb, Sichuan Provincial Orthopaedics Hospital, Chengdu 610041, China
  • Received:2018-03-16 Published:2018-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Ming Xiang
  • About author:
    Corresponding author: Xiang Ming, Email:
引用本文:

李一平, 向明, 陈杭, 胡晓川. MIPPO技术联合PHILOS治疗Neer 2部分肱骨近端骨折的疗效分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2018, 06(03): 191-198.

Yiping Li, Ming Xiang, Hang Chen, Xiaochuan Hu. Efficacy analysis of MIPPO technique combined with PHILOS internal fixation for treatment of Neer 2-part proximal humeral fractures[J]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2018, 06(03): 191-198.

目的

探讨微创经皮钢板内固定(minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis,MIPPO)技术联合肱骨近端锁定钢板内固定(proximal humerus internal lockingrn osteosynthesis system,PHILOS)治疗Neer 2部分肱骨近端骨折的疗效。

方法

纳入自2014年1月至2016年3月,使用PHILOS治疗并获得1年及以上随访的20例患者研究。2部分外科颈骨折10例,男5例,女5例,平均年龄(42.10±13.79)岁;2部分大结节骨折10例,其中男7例,女3例,平均年龄(49.80±8.13)岁。所有骨折均为闭合性骨折。术后定期复查并记录患者肩关节功能,影像学检查复位效果及愈合情况。用美国肩肘外科协会评分(rating scale of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons,ASES)、Constant-Murley评分及视觉模拟评分法(visual analogue scale,VAS)等指标评价肩关节功能。采用SPSS 22.0软件对数据进行分析,以P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

20例患者获得12~24个月的随访,平均(15.50±9.66)(12~24)个月,其中外科颈骨折患者随访平均时间为(14.40±10.88)(12~24)个月,大结节骨折患者随访时间平均为(16.05±7.92)(12~24)个月。2部分外科颈骨折与2部分大结节骨折患者手术时间分别为(120.50±27.43)(90~160)min和(133.90±46.41)(60~200)min (P=0.442);骨折愈合时间分别为(2.25±0.54)(1.5~3.0)个月和(2.60±0.81)(1.5~4.0)个月(P=0.270);VAS评分分别为(0.40±0.52)(0~1)分和(0.50±0.53)(0~1)分(P=0.673);ASES评分分别为(94.64±3.31)(90.0~98.3)分和(91.65±5.76)(85.0~98.3)分(P=0.172);Constant-Murley评分分别为(95.10±3.12)(91~99)分和(92.60±5.62)(83.5~99.0)分(P=0.235);术后前屈上举角度平均为(174.00°±5.16°)(170°~180°)和(167.00°±9.49°)(150°~180°)(P=0.055),外旋角度分别为(43.00°±8.23°)(30°~50°)和(34.00±10.75)(20°~50°)(P=0.050),外展角度平均为(158.00°±13.98°)(130°~180°)和(149.00°±19.69°)(110°~170°)(P=0.254)。

结论

2部分肱骨近端骨折采用MIPPO技术联合PHILOS治疗收到了良好的效果,在2部分外科颈与2部分大结节骨折病例中,在术后外旋角度恢复方面前者与后者差异有明显的统计学意义,但在手术时间、性别、年龄及其他术后恢复情况,差异无统计学意义。

Background

Proximal humeral fractures are relatively common in the clinical work of orthopedics. According to the literature, they account for 4% to 5% of all fracture cases, and the morbidity increases year by year. More than 71% of proximal humeral fracture cases involve the patient of 60 years or above. Neer pointed out that most of the proximal humeral fractures were slightly displaced or had no obvious displacement. With conservative treatment, the fractures above could achieve bone healing and satisfactory function. However, according to the latest multicenter study, more than 64% of proximal humeral fractures were displaced. Among all displaced proximal humeral fractures, approximately 40% were Neer type 2-part and were recommended for surgical treatment. For elderly patients or patients with severe underlying disease who cannot tolerate surgery, the conservative treatment can be taken. The advantages of traditional surgical approach include wide surgical field and anatomical reduction, but the functional recovery is affected by wide range of local soft tissue dissection, large blood supply damage and postoperative adhesion. Domestic and foreign literature studies have shown that the minimally invasive treatment of proximal humeral fractures was effective, and the proximal humerus internal locking osteosynthesis system (PHILOS) has unique advantages.

Methods

I. General information: 1. Inclusive criteria: (1) Closed fracture, the greater tuberosity fracture (displacement of >5 mm) or surgical neck fracture (angulation of >45° or displacement of >1 cm) in X-ray films without neurovascular injury; (2) Treatment of MIPPO technique combined with PHILOS internal fixation; (3) Visit within 2 weeks after injury and 12 months or more of follow-up. 2. Exclusive criteria: (1) Combination of other injuries; (2) Surgery intolerance due to severe internal medicine disease; (3) Pathological fractures. 3. Imaging evaluation: standard X-ray films, including scapular anteroposterior view, scapular lateral view and west point view. For the fractures with unclear X-ray film, thin-layer CT scan of 2 mm and 3D reconstruction are feasible. MRI can provide a more reliable interpretation of shoulder surrounding soft tissue. Especially for elderly patients with a history of shoulder dislocation, MRI is necessary to determine whether there is rotator cuff injury. From July 2014 to March 2016, 20 patients including 12 males (60%) and 8 females (40 %) with proximal humeral fractures were treated with minimally invasive percutaneous plate osteosynthesis (MIPPO) technique combined with PHILOS internal fixation, and the average age was (45.95±11.40) (22-63) years. 10 cases were 2-part greater tuberosity humerus fracture, which included 5 males (50%) and 5 females (50%) with an average age of (42.10±13.79) (22-62) years. Among them, 1 case had distal radial fracture. 10 cases were 2-part surgical neck humerus fractures, which included 7 males (70%) and 3 females (30%) with an average age of (49.80±8.13) (36-63) years. Among them: 1 case had distal radial fracture; 1 case had ulnar olecranon fracture; 1 case had multiple rib fracture. Causes of injury: 15 cases of fall damage and 5 cases of traffic accident. The time from injury to surgery ranged from 5 to 10 days with an average of 7.5 days. The X-ray film indicated greater tuberosity fractures or surgical neck fractures of humerus with displacement. This study was approved by the hospital ethics committee and all subjects signed informed consent. II. Surgical treatment: 1. Anesthesia: general anesthesia combined with brachial plexus block. 2. Surgical position: beach chair supine position with the affected shoulder joint extending beyond the outer edge of operating table and the cushion under scapula. 3. Surgical procedure: a longitudinal incision of 4 cm was made under the anterior angle of acromion. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and deep fascia were cut open layer by layer, and the approach was selected between the anterior bundle and the middle bundle of deltoid muscle. As the axillary nerve and its course were touched with finger, a suture was made with 4# silk thread at the distal end of incision for nerve protection. The wire retractors were carefully used to avoid nerve damage caused by excessive traction. The clavipectoral fascia was cut open to expose proximal humerus. No. 5 Ethbond suture was used to sew the rotator cuff tendon attached to greater and lesser tuberosities, and the greater tuberosity fractures or surgical neck fractures of humerus were reduced and then fixed temporarily with 1 or 2 Kirschner wires of 2.0 mm. A 5-hole AO 3.5 mm PHILOS plate of appropriate length was selected, and a longitudinal incision was made at the corresponding position of the anterolateral site of upper arm. The skin, subcutaneous tissue and deep fascia were cut open to expose proximal humerus through the space between deltoid and biceps. The upper and lower tunnels were perforated, and the plate was inserted from the proximal end to the distal end while staying close to periosteum. As the plate was confirmed at the center of shaft, a total of 7 or 8 screws was used for fixation in the distal and proximal ends. Under C-arm fluoroscopy, the anterior (internal, external and central position) and axillary views were conducted to check the positions and lengths of the screws, the stability of fracture ends during passive anteflexion and upward lifting, abduction and the internal and external rotation of shoulder joint, the acromial impingement syndrome and the arthralgia. The rotator cuff was repaired if damaged. Combined fractures of other parts in ipsilateral extremity should be operated simultaneously. After operation, the deltoid muscular tension was examined to determine whether the axillary nerve was damaged. III. Postoperative management: The incision was closed layer by layer, and both patients were required to place a drainage tube. The drainage tube was removed on the 1st postoperative day according to the volume of drainage, Antibiotics were used prophylactically for 1 day in both groups. The affected limb in patients with rotator cuff injury was immobilized with shoulder abduction and external rotation brace for protection of 6 weeks, and the active exercises of wrist, elbow and fingers of the affected limb were allowed on the 1st day after surgery. The affected limb in patients without rotator cuff tear was immobilized with forearm sling for protection of 4 weeks, and the pendulum exercises and passive anteflexion and upward lifting of shoulder joints were allowed on the 1st postoperative day. All patients started limb-assisted shoulder joint activities in the 2nd week, and active shoulder joint exercises in the 3rd week. The shoulder abduction and upward lifting were controlled within 60° 3 weeks after operation, and 90° after 4 weeks. As X-ray films showed osteophyte growth 6 weeks after operation, the sling was removed to perform active shoulder joint exercises. At 3 months after surgery, the affected limb could perform daily activities without limitation. IV. Efficacy evaluation indicators: All surgery was performed by the same group of doctors, and the outpatient visit and evaluation were conducted by another two senior orthopedic surgeons. The patients were followed up closely after discharge from the hospital, and regularly reviewed at 1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th and 12th months after operation. The anteroposterior view, lateral view and west point view X-ray films of the shoulder joint were taken according to the situation. The operation time, blood loss, internal fixator position, fracture healing and functional status of the two groups was compared. The shoulder joint function was assessed using shoulder joint mobility, rating scale of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES) , and Constant-Murley score. The pain of affected shoulder joint was evaluated using visual analogue scale (VAS) . Among them, 0 point was divided into completely painless, 1-3 points was divided into mild pain, 4-6 points was divided into moderate pain and 7-10 points was divided into severe pain. The ASES score is the shoulder joint function evaluation criteria developed by ASES, including pain (50%) and life function (50%) , with a total score of 100 points. The higher the score, the better the shoulder function. The Constant-Murley score is used for shoulder joint evaluation, including pain (15 points) , daily life (20 points) , deltoid muscle strength (25 points) , and range of motion (40 points) ; 90-100 points are considered excellent, 80-89 points are considered good, 70-79 points are considered moderate and <70 points are considered poor. V. Statistical software and methods: SPSS22.0 software was used for data analysis. The quantitative data were described by the mean±standard deviation, and the independent sample t test was used for statistical inference. The qualitative data were described by percentage, and the Chi-square test was used for statistical inference; A value of P≤0.05 was regarded as statistical difference.

Results

Twenty patients were followed up for 12 to 24 months with an average of (15.50±9.66) months. The mean follow-up time of patients with greater tuberosity fractures was (16.05±7.92) months. The mean follow-up of patients with humeral surgical neck fractures was (14.40±10.88) month. All patients attained fracture healing without the complication of axillary nerve injury, humeral head necrosis loosening plate, broken nail, delayed union, nonunion or infection. Among them, 12 were male and 8 were female (P=0.515) . The mean ages of the two groups were (42.10±13.79) (36-63) years and (49.80±8.13) (22-62) years (P=0.146) respectively; the mean operation times were (120.50±27.43) (90-160) mins and (133.90±46.41) (60-200) mins (P=0.442) respectively; the mean fracture healing times were (2.25±0.54) (1.5-3.0) months and (2.60±0.81) (1.5-4.0) months (P=0.270) respectively; the mean VAS scores were (0.40±0.52) (0-1) points and (0.50±0.53) (0-1) points (P=0.673) respectively; the mean ASES scores were (94.64±3.31) (90-98.3) points and (91.65±5.76) (85.0-98.3) points (P=0.172) respectively; the mean Constant-Murley scores were (95.10±3.12) (91-99) points and (92.60±5.62) (83.5-99.0) points (P=0.235) respectively; the mean postoperative anteflexion and upward lifting angles were (174.00°±5.16°) (170°-180°) and (167.00°±9.49°) (150°-180°) (P=0.055) respectively; the mean external rotation angles were (43.00°±8.23°) (30°-50°) and (34.00°±10.75°) (20°-50°) (P=0.050) respectively; the mean abduction angles were (158.00°±13.98°) (130°-180°) and (149.00°±19.69°) (110°-170°) (P=0.254) respectively.

Conclusions

The treatment of Neer 2-part proximal humeral fractures with MIPPO technique combined with PHILOS internal fixation was clinically validated. There was significant difference in postoperative external rotation angle restoration between the cases of 2-part humerus surgical neck fractures and 2-part humerus greater tuberosity fractures. However, there was no significant difference in operation time, gender, age and postoperative recovery.

图1 患者,女,40岁,右侧2部分大结节骨折 图A、B:术前肩关节正侧位X线片;图C、D:术后2年肩关节正侧位X线片;图E:术中切口照片;图F-I:末次随访(2年)时功能(F:前屈上举180°;G:体侧外旋50°;H:外展110°;I:内旋摸背达第八胸椎水平)
图2 患者,男,25岁,左侧2部分外科颈骨折 图A、B:肩关节正侧位X线片;图C、D:术后2年肩关节(左)正侧位X线片;图E:术中切口照片;图F、I 末次随访(2年)功能(F:前屈上举170°,G:体侧外旋50°,H:外展170°,I:内旋摸背达第八胸椎水平)
[1]
Südkamp N,Bayer J,Hepp P, et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximalhumerus plate. Results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2009, 91(6):1320-1328.
[2]
Burkhart KJ,Dietz SO,Bastian L, et al. The treatment of proximal humeral fracture in adults[J].Dtsch Arztebl Int, 2013, 110(35-36):591-597.
[3]
Widnall JC,Dheerendra SK,Malal JJ, et al. Proximal humeral fractures: a review of current concepts[J]. Open Orthop J, 2013, 7, (Suppl 3: M12) 361-365.
[4]
Horak J,Nlisson BE. Dpidemilogy of fracture of the upper end of the humerus[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1975 (112):250-253.
[5]
Tamai K,Ishige N,Kuroda S, et al. Four-Segment classification of proximal humerus revisited:A multicenter study on 509 cases[J].J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2009, 18(6):845-850.
[6]
Fakler JK,Hogan C,Heyde CE, et al. Current concepts in the treatment of proximal humeral fractures[J]. Orthopedics, 2008, 31(1): 42-51.
[7]
Robinson CM,Christie J. The two-part proximal humeral fracture: a review of operative treatment using two techniques[J]. Injury, 1993, 24(2): 123-125.
[8]
Hintermann B,Trouillier HH,Seh6fer D. Rigid internal fixation of fractures of the proximal humerus in older patients[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2000, 82(8): 1107-1112.
[9]
Bogner R,Ortmaier R,Moroder P, et al. Minimally invasive treatment of displaced proximal humeral fractures in patients older than 70 years using the humerusblock [J]. Biomed Res Int. 2016, 2016:6451849.
[10]
陈旭宏.鲍丰. MIPPO技术在肱骨近端骨折钢板内固定术中的应用[J]. 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2017, 3(3):302-303.
[11]
陈鹏,田晓滨.切开复位内固定与微创经皮钢板接骨术治疗复杂肱骨近端骨折的疗效比较[J].中华创伤骨科杂志, 2016, 18(7):592-596.
[12]
Koljonen PA,Fang C,Lau TW, et al. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis for proximal humeral fractures[J]. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2015, 23(2):160-163.
[13]
Richards RR,An KN,Bigliani LU, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 1994, 3(6):347-352.
[14]
Constant CR,Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder[J]. Clin Orthop Rel Res, 1987, (214): 160-164.
[15]
Krettek C,Grerich T,Miclau T. A minimally invasive medial approach for proximal tibial fraaures[J]. Injury, 2001, 32(1): 4-13.
[16]
Maier D,Jaeger M,Izadpanah K, et al. Proximal humeral fracture treatment in adults[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2014, 5;96(3):251-261.
[17]
张军,袁承杰,曹烈虎,等. 锁定钢板与髓内钉治疗肱骨近端骨折疗效比较的Meta分析[J/CD]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2016, 4(4):207-213.
[18]
Siffri PC,Peindl RD,Coley ER, et al. Biomechanical analysis of blade plate versus locking plate fixation for a proximal humerus fracture:comparison using cadaverci and sunthetic humeri[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2006, 20(8):547-554.
[19]
Edwards SL,Wilson NA,Zhang LQ, et al. Two-part surgical neck fractures of the proximal part of the huerus.a biomechanical evaluation of two fixation techniques[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2006, 88(10):2258-2264.
[20]
Sproul RC,Iyengar JJ,Devcic Z, et al. A systematic review of locking plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures[J]. Injury, 2011. 42 (4):408-413.
[21]
Robinson CM,Wylie JR,Ray AG, et al. Proximal humeral fractures with a severe varus deformity treated by fixation with a locking plate[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 2010, 92(5):672-678.
[22]
Falez F,Papalia M,Greco A, et al. Minimally invasive plate osteosynthesis in proximal humeral fractures: one-year results of a prospective multicenter study[J]. Int Orthop, 2016, 40(3):579-585.
[23]
Liu K,Liu PC,Liu R, et al. Advantage of minimally invasive lateral approach relative to conventional deltopectoral approach for treatment of proximal humerus fractures[J]. Med Sci Monit, 2015, 21(15):496-504.
[24]
Maier D,Jaeger M,Izadpanah K, et al. Proximal humeral fracture treatment in adults[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2014,96(3):251-261.
[25]
Burkhart KJ,Dietz SO,Bastian L, et al. The treatment of proximal humeral fracture in adults[J]. Dtsch Arztebl Int, 2013, 110(35-36): 591-597.
[26]
韩立强,江汉,肖联平,等. T形切口下微创锁定钢板治疗肱骨近端骨折疗效探讨[J/CD]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2014(4):225-229.
[27]
杨国勇,向明,陈杭,等.关节镜下中空螺钉和(或)锚钉缝线桥技术固定肱骨大结节骨折[J].中华骨科杂, 2017, 37(21):1342-1349.
[28]
Viecili L,Turco DL,Ramalho JH, et al. Treatment of two-part fractures of the surgical neck of The humerus using a locked metaphyseal intramedullary nail proximally with an gular stability[J]. Rev Bras Ortop, 2015, 50(1):22-29.
[1] 单磊, 周君琳. 同期修复肩袖撕裂结合锁定钢板治疗老年肱骨近端骨折的特点及疗效分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(03): 211-215.
[2] 乐佳迪, 蔡乐益, 陈思源, 鲁建鹏, 陈龙. 肱骨近端骨折经微创钢板接骨术治疗术后的放射学测量与肩关节功能关系[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(01): 61-68.
[3] 代飞, 向明. 肱骨距螺钉在肱骨近端骨折治疗中的研究进展[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(04): 373-376.
[4] 李明震, 韩勇, 路庆森, 王甫. 肱骨近端骨折中内侧锁定钢板重建内侧柱的有限元分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(04): 321-329.
[5] 李立, 王红莉, 常红, 张艳. 肱骨近端骨折术后功能康复策略现状及新理念下的研究进展[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 284-287.
[6] 左楠, 刘岩, 孙大辉, 刘哲闻, 杨光. 胸大肌三角肌入路与经三角肌外侧入路治疗肱骨近端骨折的疗效分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 252-257.
[7] 宗宇宁, 薛海鹏, 韩天宇, 张昊, 王帅, 马翔宇, 纪振钢, 周大鹏. 解剖状骨水泥占位器在治疗内侧柱缺失型肱骨近端骨折中的实用性的有限元分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 242-251.
[8] 车娟, 刘俊阳. 肱骨近端骨折围手术期深静脉血栓发生因素分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 146-149.
[9] 张晓萌, 杨杰, 刘海, 王艳华, 张一翀, 张立佳, 熊晨, 唐缪田, 张殿英. 科研创新就在我们身边[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(01): 1-6.
[10] 刘兵, 马翔宇, 杨超, 周大鹏. 应用Philos钢板联合个体化髓内解剖型骨水泥占位器治疗老年骨质疏松性肱骨近端骨折的临床疗效[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(04): 293-299.
[11] 丁小方, 杨黎黎, 周海涛, 纪坤羽, 杨鹏杰, 杨坤, 吕昊润, 王元利, 付中国. 基于"悬臂-杠杆重建-不稳定"理论的老年肱骨近端粉碎骨折术后康复策略探讨[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(03): 232-238.
[12] 程邦君, 黄燕峰, 罗轶, 何耀华. 两种手术方法治疗Neer Ⅲ型肱骨近端骨折的临床研究[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2021, 09(04): 335-340.
[13] 金万通, 薛海鹏, 周大鹏, 刘兵, 纪振钢, 马翔宇, 杨超, 张昊, 韩宁, 宗宇宁, 张咏晧, 马泽方. 3D打印结合PMMA骨水泥髓内支撑技术在老年肱骨近端骨质疏松性骨折中的应用[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(05): 276-284.
[14] 杨良栋, 张华泽, 何举仁, 高艳刚, 李栋. 锁定钢板与交锁髓内钉固定治疗老年Neer分型2、3部分肱骨近端骨折的疗效比较[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2022, 08(02): 96-103.
[15] 赵阔, 王忠正, 王宇钏, 张浚哲, 郭家良, 郑占乐, 陈伟, 张英泽. 双反牵引复位器联合MIPO技术治疗肱骨近端骨折的初步应用[J]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2021, 07(06): 321-325.
阅读次数
全文


摘要