切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2026, Vol. 14 ›› Issue (03) : 157 -163. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2026.03.005

论著

低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线或锚钉治疗肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折的对比研究
徐广, 程征, 周亚丽, 郭亮, 朱慧华, 沈作佳()   
  1. 324100 江山市人民医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2026-04-23 出版日期:2026-08-05
  • 通信作者: 沈作佳
  • 基金资助:
    衢州市科学技术局指导性科技攻关项目(2025ZD094)

Low-profile anatomic locking plate combined with suture fixation versus suture anchor fixation for comminuted greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus: a comparative study

Guang Xu, Zheng Cheng, Yali Zhou, Liang Guo, Huihua Zhu, Zuojia Shen()   

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Jiangshan People's Hospital , Jiangshan 324100, China
  • Received:2026-04-23 Published:2026-08-05
  • Corresponding author: Zuojia Shen
引用本文:

徐广, 程征, 周亚丽, 郭亮, 朱慧华, 沈作佳. 低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线或锚钉治疗肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(03): 157-163.

Guang Xu, Zheng Cheng, Yali Zhou, Liang Guo, Huihua Zhu, Zuojia Shen. Low-profile anatomic locking plate combined with suture fixation versus suture anchor fixation for comminuted greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus: a comparative study[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2026, 14(03): 157-163.

目的

通过回顾性研究比较低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线或锚钉治疗肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折的临床疗效。

方法

纳入2022年1月至2025年8月于江山市人民医院接受低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线或锚钉治疗的肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折患者共54例,对患者的手术时间、术中出血量、骨折愈合时间、术后3个月及6个月Constant-Murley评分、术后疼痛和并发症方面进行对比。

结果

所有患者均手术顺利。锚钉组平均手术时间为(54.13±9.24)min,术中出血量(56.68±14.42)ml,骨折愈合时间(11.39±2.25)周;缝线组平均手术时间为(53.59±10.12)min,术中出血量(57.59±12.27)ml,骨折愈合时间(10.74±3.12)周,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。肩关节功能评估显示,术后3个月、6个月锚钉组Constant-Murley评分均优于缝线组(P<0.05)。疼痛视觉模拟评分方面,术后3个月、6个月锚钉组均优于缝线组(P<0.05)。并发症方面,锚钉组出现2例部分骨块复位丢失,缝线组发生4例肩峰下撞击和5例部分骨块复位丢失,组间差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合锚钉治疗肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折的短期临床疗效优于钢板联合缝线的手术方法,但该结论基于小样本分析,有待进一步大样本研究验证。

Background

Proximal humeral fractures account for approximately 5% of all fractures. The greater tuberosity of the humerus is an important anatomical structure involved in shoulder abduction and external rotation, and isolated greater tuberosity fractures account for 14%-21% of all proximal humeral fractures. Greater tuberosity fractures are also present in 5%-30% of anterior shoulder dislocations. Previous studies have recommended surgical treatment when displacement of a greater tuberosity fracture exceeds 5 mm. If inadequately treated, these injuries may result in poor functional outcomes. Compared with nonoperative treatment, surgical treatment aims to restore the anatomical position of the displaced greater tuberosity and preserve rotator cuff tendon integrity, thereby providing adequate mechanical stability, facilitating early postoperative rehabilitation, and reducing the risk of adhesion formation. However, no universally accepted gold-standard treatment has been established for displaced greater tuberosity fractures. Although most surgical techniques for displaced isolated greater tuberosity fractures have produced predictable outcomes, recurrent complete or partial displacement of fracture fragments remains frequently reported after surgery for comminuted greater tuberosity fractures involving three or more fragments. Such displacement may compromise postoperative rehabilitation, and the optimal treatment remains controversial.

Objective

To retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes of low-profile anatomic locking plate fixation combined with either suture fixation or suture anchor fixation for comminuted greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus.

Methods

A total of 54 patients with comminuted greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus who underwent low-profile anatomic locking plate fixation combined with either sutures or suture anchors at Jiangshan People's Hospital between January 2022 and August 2025 were included. The two groups were compared in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, time to fracture union, Constant-Murley scores at 3 and 6 months postoperatively, postoperative pain, and complications.

Results

Surgery was completed successfully in all patients. In the suture anchor group, the mean operative time was (54.13± 9.24) min, mean intraoperative blood loss was (56.68± 14.42) ml, and mean time to fracture union was (11.39± 2.25) weeks. The corresponding values in the suture group were (53.59± 10.12) min, (57.59± 12.27) ml, and (10.74± 3.12) weeks, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups for these variables (all P > 0.05) . The Constant-Murley scores at 3 and 6 months postoperatively were significantly higher in the suture anchor group than in the suture group (both P < 0.05) . Visual analogue scale pain scores at both postoperative time points were significantly lower in the suture anchor group (both P < 0.05) . Regarding complications, partial loss of fracture reduction occurred in 2 patients in the suture anchor group. In the suture group, subacromial impingement occurred in 4 patients, and partial loss of fracture reduction occurred in 5 patients. The difference in the overall incidence of complications between the groups was statistically significant (P < 0.05) .

Conclusion

Low-profile anatomic locking plate fixation combined with suture anchors provides better short-term clinical outcomes than locking plate fixation combined with sutures for comminuted greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus. However, this conclusion is based on a relatively small sample and requires confirmation in larger studies.

表1 两组患者基本资料比较
图1 低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线固定示意图
图2 低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合锚钉固定示意图
表2 两组患者手术相关指标与功能随访比较(±s
图3 典型病例1:患者,男性,50岁,右肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折伴移位,行低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合缝线内固定 图A-B:术前CT片及三维重建;图C-D:术后1 d复查CT及三维重建提示骨折已复位,内固定在位;图E-F:术后3个月复查CT及三维重建提示粉碎的骨折块再发移位至肱骨头上方
图4 典型病例2:患者,女性,67岁,右肱骨大结节粉碎性骨折伴移位,行低剖面解剖锁定钢板联合锚钉内固定 图A-D:术前CT片及三维重建;图E:术中于关节面内侧缘靠近肱骨头软骨缘处植入锚钉;图F:将锚钉线依次穿过肩袖;图G-H:将缝线穿过钢板预留孔后植入螺钉固定钢板;图I-J:术中透视图;图K-L:术后1 d复查CT及三维重建提示骨折已复位,内固定在位
[1]
Ju JB,Ma M,Zhang Y,et al. Fracture Line Morphology of Greater Tuberosity Fragments of Neer Three- and Four-Part Proximal Humerus Fractures[J] .Orthop Surg, 2022, 15(8): 1959-1966.
[2]
Kim YJ,Ji JH,Park SE,et al. Comparison between arthroscopic suture anchor fixation and open plate fixation in the greater tuberosity fracture of the proximal humerus[J] .Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2023, 34(1): 621-631.
[3]
Kim D,Lim JR,Yoon TH,et al. Lateral Wall Integrity of the Greater Tuberosity Is Important for the Stability of Osteoporotic Proximal Humeral Fractures After Plate Fixation[J] .J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2024, 106(19): 1750-1756.
[4]
Roddy E,Kandemir U.High rate of avascular necrosis but excellent patient-reported outcomes after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of proximal humerus fracture dislocations: should ORIF be considered as primary treatment[J] .J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2023, 32(10): 2097-2104.
[5]
Kan KA,Chang WC,Cheng MF,et al. Inferior subluxation of the humeral head after plate surgery for proximal humerus fracture is not always benign[J] .J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2025, 34(10): 2322-2329.
[6]
Ju J,Ma M,Ding Z,et al. A Transosseous Suture as an Alternative to Suture Anchor on Anterior-Avulsion Greater Tuberosity Fragment Fixation in Neer Three-Part Proximal Humeral Fracture: A Biomechanical Study[J] .Orthop Surg, 2022, 15(8): 2132-2137.
[7]
Regnard S,Maynou C,Clavert P,et al. Radiologic evaluation of the healing of the greater tubercle after humeral hemiarthroplasty with Aequalis-fracture-implants for proximal humeral fracture: a retrospective cohort study in 45 shoulders[J] .Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2024, 111(1): 104002.
[8]
Doursounian L,Gregory T,Miques M,et al.A prognostic classification of proximal humerus fractures: the cephalic extension staging[J] . Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol, 2023, 34(1): 143-153.
[9]
尹世豪,张琳袁,崔煦,等.单纯肱骨大结节骨折内固定术后失败原因分析及治疗策略[J].中华手外科杂志202440(3) :248-252.
[10]
Kuan FC,Hsu KL,Hong CK,et al. Biomechanical comparisons of hook plate and screw fixations in split-type greater tuberosity fractures of the humerus[J] .J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2022, 31(6): 1308-1315.
[11]
张琳袁,吴佳俊,崔煦,等. 大结节解剖钢板与PHILOS内固定治疗伴肩关节脱位的Mutch I/Ⅱ型肱骨大结节骨折的疗效差异[J/CD] .中华肩肘外科电子杂志202311(2) :139-145.
[12]
Chang MY,Hsu LI,Wu CY,et al. Effect of humerus rotation on the initial stability of locking plate fixation for proximal humerus fracture: A biomechanics study[J] .Injury, 2026, 57(4): 113160.
[1] 吴超, 王争刚, 罗晓东, 范斌, 刘彬. 骨科机器人辅助动力交叉钉治疗不稳定型股骨颈骨折[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(06): 669-676.
[2] 陈明亮, 王颉, 谷成毅, 周游. 内侧半月板后根部撕裂诊治进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(04): 486-493.
[3] 吴剑宏, 毕春, 黄寅骏, 王琦, 吴晓明. 肱骨头及内外前侧结构在肱骨近端骨折手术治疗中的临床意义[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(02): 65-70.
[4] 孙懿贤, 朱金雨, 刘一超, 孙鲁宁. 反向全肩关节置换术治疗肱骨近端骨折内固定失败的疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2026, 14(01): 29-37.
[5] 张靖杰, 江惠祥, 肖棋, 邓辉云, 吴清泉, 郑佳鹏. 改良缝线桥技术与传统缝线桥技术治疗肩袖损伤的临床疗效对比[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(04): 203-209.
[6] 高晓红, 王雪臣, 刘世炎, 孟小光, 徐凤松, 史福东. 带袢钛板与锁骨钩板治疗肩锁关节Rockwood Ⅲ、Ⅳ型脱位的对比研究[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(04): 226-231.
[7] 王冰, 李守玺, 张亮银, 吕长举, 朱沛, 张正鹏. 肱骨近端骨折内固定术后内翻畸形的影像学参数分析[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(02): 95-100.
[8] 邢博涵, 曲洋, 蒋浩然, 张蒙, 张培训. 肩关节骨折内固定术后感染的原因分析与治疗进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2025, 13(02): 107-111.
[9] 史翔宇. 玻璃体切除联合人工晶状体取出及人工晶状体缝线固定术[J/OL]. 中华眼科医学杂志(电子版), 2025, 15(02): 128-128.
[10] 刘改梅, 朱彦东, 舒庆. 地舒单抗注射液联合碳酸钙D3片对老年股骨转子间骨折髓内针内固定术后恢复的影响[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(03): 166-172.
[11] 曹鹏飞, 何毅, 张寅, 徐训安, 蒋淳, 刘勇. 跟骨载距突外侧壁投影的解剖学研究及其在骨折内固定手术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(01): 54-58.
[12] 王晓伟, 杨红梅, 孙天胜, 刘智, 刘川, 高杰. 髓内钉治疗老年股骨转子间骨折术后内固定相关并发症预测模型建立与验证[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2026, 12(01): 38-46.
[13] 赵雪超, 佟向阳, 刘大诚, 张强. 切开复位内固定术联合不同韧带修复方式治疗踝关节骨折合并下胫腓前韧带断裂的疗效[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(05): 309-314.
[14] 孙开旺, 屈建国, 赵春秀. LCP与PFNA内固定治疗股骨粗隆间不稳定性骨折的效果观察[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(03): 147-152.
[15] 张超, 吴雨桐, 杨子飞, 杨鹤. 不稳定老年股骨粗隆间骨折PFNA内固定术后颈干角丢失原因分析及处理策略[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2025, 11(03): 129-138.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?