REVIEW ARTICLE
Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for the Treatment of 3 and 4- Part Fractures of the Humeral Head in the Elderly
Ioannis Gigis1, *, Alexandros Nenopoulos1, Dimitrios Giannekas1, Roderich Heikenfeld2, Theodoros Beslikas1, Ippokratis Hatzokos1
Article Information
Identifiers and Pagination:
Year: 2017Volume: 11
Issue: Suppl-1, M5
First Page: 108
Last Page: 118
Publisher ID: TOORTHJ-11-108
DOI: 10.2174/1874325001711010108
Article History:
Received Date: 02/01/2016Revision Received Date: 18/04/2016
Acceptance Date: 20/04/2016
Electronic publication date: 28/02/2017
Collection year: 2017

open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public License (CC-BY 4.0), a copy of which is available at: (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode). This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Abstract
Background:
Proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients present with severe comminution and osteoporotic bone quality.
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty has lately been proven beneficial in treating patients with complex proximal humeral fractures. The above technique is recommended and has better results in elderly than in younger individuals.
Methods:
We performed a literature search in the databases Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library for published articles between 1970 and 2016 using the terms: proximal humerus fractures and reverse shoulder arthroplasty.
Results:
Significant benefits with the use of reverse prosthesis, especially in patients older than 70 years with a proximal humeral fracture, include reduced rehabilitation time as well as conservation of a fixed fulcrum for deltoid action in case of rotator cuff failure.
Compared with hemiarthroplasty and internal fixation, reverse prosthesis may be particularly useful and give superior outcomes in older patients, due to comminuted fractures in osteopenic bones.
However, significant disadvantages of this technique are potential complications and a demanding learning curve.Therefore, trained surgeons should follow specific indications when applying the particular treatment of proximal humeral fractures and be familiar with the surgical technique.
Conclusion:
Although long-term results and randomized studies for reverse prosthesis are lacking, short and mid- term outcomes have given promising results encouraging more shoulder surgeons to use this type of prosthesis in proximal humeral fractures.