header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

GRAMMONT REVERSED ARTHROPLASTY FOR RECENT SHOULDER TRAUMA IN THE ELDERLY PATIENT: 5–11 YEARS FOLLOW-UP



Abstract

Purpose of the study: Hemi-arthroplasty, osteosynthesis, and ball-and-socket implants provide well-known results for the management of displaced joint fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly subjects. The purpose of this work was to assess the reversed Grammont prosthesis for these indications.

Material and methods: From 1993 to 1999, eighteen Delta III prostheses were implanted by the same operator in recent trauma victims. The patients, 17 women and one man, mean age 75 years, presented four-fragment fractures (n=15) or fracture dislocation (n=3). The dominant side was involved in nine cases. These patients presented infiltrative rotator cuff tendinopathy (n=4), type 1 diabetes mellitus (n=2), exogenosis (n=2), morbid obestity (n=2), homelessness (n=2), and dementia (n=2). Surgery was performed under general anesthesia in the semi-sitting position via a trapezodeltoid approach without acromion osteotomy and with 20° humeral implant retroversion in all cases except one, cemented in 17 cases. The tubercles could be reinserted in four patients. Rehabilitation was not always possible. The Constant score and the anteroposterior and Lamy lateral views were used to assess clinical and radiographic outcome.

Results: There were two deaths, so the analysis included 16 shoulders. Complications were: shoulder-hand syndrome (n=1), early deep Acinetobacter infection with revision and preservation of the arthroplasty (n=1), anterior dislocation at one month due to voluntary 10° anterotation of the humeral stem requiring reorientation (n=1). At mean follow-up of 85 months, the Constant score was 60, with a weighted score of 83%. The results were not influenced by reinsertion of the tubercles and were considered good for pain and activity, fair for strength, and disappointing for rotations. The x-rays did not reveal any sign of humeral loosening. There was one lucent line between the glenoid and the metaglenoid, four cases with pillar notches, and nine infraglenoid ossifications.

Discussion and conclusion: For displaced joint fractures of the proximal humerus, endomedullary osteosynthesis and the ball-and-socket implant have shown their efficacy as an alternative to hemiarthroplasty. The reverted prosthesis also appears to be a valid therapeutic option for elderly persons with osteoporotic bone compromising the reinsertion of the tubercules. This option enables good results for pain, activity, strenth and active mobility except for rotation, with only five signs of gravity for the glenoid with one involving the glenoid and none the humerus at 85 months follow-up. These results should be further confirmed with a larger series and longer follow-up.

Correspondence should be addressed to SOFCOT, 56 rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris, France.