Calcar screw position in proximal humerus fracture fixation: Don't miss high!. Issue 3 (March 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mehta, Samir; Chin, Matthew; Sanville, Jennifer; Namdari, Surena; Hast, Michael W.
• Is Part Of: Injury. Volume 49:Issue 3(2018)
• Page Start: 624
• Page End: 629
• Publication Date: 2018-03
• Subjects: Proximal humerus -- Fracture -- Locking plates -- Biomechanics -- Fixation strategy; Wounds and injuries -- Surgery -- Periodicals; Accidents -- Periodicals; Wounds and Injuries -- surgery -- Periodicals; Lésions et blessures -- Chirurgie -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; Electronic journals; 617.1
• DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.02.007
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0020-1383

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: In locked plate fixation of proximal humerus fractures, the calcar is an important anchor point for screws providing much-needed medial column support. Most locking plate implants utilize a fixed-trajectory locking screw to achieve this goal. Consequently, adjustments of plate location to account for patient-specific anatomy may result in a screw position outside of the calcar. To date, little is known about the consequences of "missing" the calcar during plate positioning. This study sought to characterize the biomechanics associated with proximal and distal placement of locking plates in a two-part fracture model. Materials and methods: This experiment was performed twice, first with elderly cadaveric specimens and again with osteoporotic sawbones. Two-part fractures were simulated and specimens were divided to represent proximal, neutral, and distal plate placements. Non-destructive torsional and axial compression tests were performed prior to an axial fatigue test and a ramp to failure. Torsional stiffness, axial stiffness, humeral head displacement and stiffness during fatigue testing, and ultimate load were compared between groups. Results: Cadavers: Proximal implant placement led to trends of decreased mechanical properties, but there were no significant differences found between groups. Sawbones: Distal placement increased torsional stiffness in both directions (p = 0.003, p = 0.034) and axial stiffness (p = 0.018) when compared to proximal placement. Distal placement also increased torsional stiffness in external rotation (p = 0.020), increased axial stiffness (p = 0.024), decreased humeral head displacement during fatigue testing, and increased stiffness during fatigue testing when compared to neutral placement. Discussion: The distal and neutral groups had similar mechanical properties in many cadaveric comparisons while the proximal group trended towards decreased construct stiffness. Results: from the Sawbones model were more definitive and provided further evidence that proximal calcar screw placements are undesirable and distal implant placement may provide improved construct stability. Conclusion: Successful proximal humerus fracture reconstruction is inherent upon anatomic fracture reduction coupled with medial column support. Results from this experiment suggest that missing the calcar proximally is deleterious to fixation strength, while it is safe, and perhaps even desirable, to aim slightly distal to the intended target.