ОПЕРАТИВНОЕ ЛЕЧЕНИЕ БОЛЬНЫХ С ОСКОЛЬЧАТЫМИ ПЕРЕЛОМАМИ ПРОКСИМАЛЬНОГО ОТДЕЛА ПЛЕЧЕВОЙ КОСТИ

A.B. Imanaliev; A.M. Tashmatov; B.Sh. Ermatov

doi:10.54890/1694-8882-2024-4-104

A.B. Imanaliev A.M. Tashmatov B.Sh. Ermatov

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54890/1694-8882-2024-4-104

Abstract

Currently, according to the current literature, there is no universally accepted protocol for the treatment of patients with proximal humerus fractures. According to various authors, the risk of delayed consolidation and formation of a false joint reaches 10% of cases. Fractures of the proximal humerus are common injuries, with the majority being over 60 years of age. There are many conservative and operative methods to treat such injuries, such as immobilisation and early initiation of movement, percutaneous osteosynthesis with spokes, osteosynthesis with plates and pins, and prosthetic shoulder joints. The authors studied the results of treatment of fragility fractures of the proximal part of the humerus in 35 patients treated at KBSMP. The aim of this study was to report the results of surgical treatment of proximal humerus fractures.
The gold standard of treatment according to our data is osteosynthesis with T- and LCP-plates. Out of 28 patients followed up in the long term, 13 (46.5%) had an excellent treatment result, 8 (28.6%) had a good treatment result, 5 (17.8%) had a satisfactory treatment result, and 2 (7.1%) had an unsatisfactory treatment result. The positive result of treatment was 92.1 per cent.

Keywords:

proximal shoulder fractures, osteosynthesis, bone plates

Author Biographies

A.B. Imanaliev, Kyrgyz State Medical Academy named after I.K. Akhunbaev

Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Extreme Surgery

A.M. Tashmatov, Kyrgyz State Medical Academy named after I.K. Akhunbaev

Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Extreme Surgery

B.Sh. Ermatov, Kyrgyz State Medical Academy named after I.K. Akhunbaev

Department of Traumatology, Orthopedics and Extreme Surgery

References

1. Архипов С.В., Кавалерский Г.М. Плечо: Современные хирургические технологии. М.: Медицина; 2009. 192 с.

2. Кондырев Н.М. Копенкин С.С., Скорогладов А.В. Обоснование выбора метода лечения у больных с «бытовыми» и «высокоэнергетическими» переломами проксимального отдела плечевой кости. Кубанский научный медицинский вестник. 2015;(2):49-56.

3. Маркин В.А., Сергеев С.В., Аптуфьева Р.И., Сальников П.А. Реабилитация больных с переломами проксимального метаэпифиза плечевой кости. Медицинская реабилитация. 2007;2:7-16.

4. Файн. А.М., Ваза А.Ю., Сластинин В.В., Титов Р.С. Диагностика и лечение переломов проксимального отдела плечевой кости. Журнал им. Н.В. Склифосовского, Неотложная медицинская помощь. 2018;2:144-151.

5. Макарова С.И. Лечение переломов проксимального отдела плечевой кости [автореферат]. Нижний Новгород; 2007. 19 с.

6. Burkhart RJ, Dietz SO, Bastian L, Thelen U, Hoffmann R, Müller LP. The treatment of proximal humeral fracture in adults. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2013;110(35-36):591-597. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2013.0591

7. Muller M, Koch P, Nazarian S, Schatzker J. The compherensive classification of fractures of long bones. New York: Springer; 1990. 201 p.

8. Sidor ML, Zuckerman JD, Lyon T, Koval K, Schoenberg N. Classification of proximal humerus fractures: The contribution of the scapular lateral and axillary radiographs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994;3(1):24-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(09)80004-9

9. Ташматов А.М. Тактико-технические ошибки оперативного лечения переломов костей конечностей. Вестник КГМА им. И.К. Ахунбаева. 2015;1(1):118-120.