Distribution & Access For Publication Downloads News About Us Contact Us
Paper Titles
Efficiency of Structural Antigipoxants in Perioperative Period of Patients with Lower Limbs Fractures
p.1
Diagnostic and Prophilactics of Early Instability’s Development in Cementless Endoprosthetics of Hip Joint
p.8
Important Aspects of Staging of Biofilm’s Formation and Justification of Time Intervals of Conduction of Prophylactics of Infectious Complications
p.17
Modern X-Ray Methods for Studying Bone Tissue
p.25
The Current State of the Problem of Treatment of Patients with Proximal Humeral Fractures against the Background of Osteoporosis
p.35
General Principles and Special Features of Histological and Immunohistochemical Methods of Bone Tissue Examination
p.45
Results of the Experimental Research and Clinical Application of Cannulated Screw with Bioactive Coverage on the Basis of Natural Hydroxiapatite during Osteosynthesis of Medial Fractures of Femur’s Neck
p.52
Results of the Proliferative Activity’s Analysis of Bifidobacterium Exometabolites in Regard to Hospital Isolates from Patients after Vascular Synthetic Prosthetics Implantation
p.60
Preservation of Bone Tissue Quality during the Usage of Synthetic Bioactive Calcium Phosphate Mineral Coating for Prevention of Metallic Construction Migration
p.67

The Current State of the Problem of Treatment of Patients with Proximal Humeral Fractures against the Background of Osteoporosis

Article Preview

Abstract:

This study focuses on problems of treatment of proximal humeral fractures occurring against the background of osteoporosis. It presents statistics on osteoporosis and lower energy trauma among patients in the Russian Federation and abroad. The high susceptibility to osteoporotic changes in the bone structure of the male population of Russia compared to the global statistics of osteoporosis among men was emphasized. The main classifications used in the clinical practice of orthopedists and traumatologists allow to identify the type of fracture by clinical and anatomical basis and to structure the existing patient management tactics to achieve the most optimal result of treatment and restoration of limb function. There is an analysis of publications representing various methods of fracture treatment, which helps to use the most optimal methods of relevant fractures treatment.

You might also be interested in these eBooks
Journal of Biomimetics, Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering Vol. 46 View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Journal of Biomimetics, Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering (Volume 46)

Pages:

35-44

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/JBBBE.46.35

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

June 2020

Authors:

Yuri Dorofeev, Dzhamilay Murzaeva, Rovshan Alekberov, Evgeniya Ryabko

Keywords:

Fracture, Osteoporosis, Proximal Humerus, Reduction of Bone Mineral Density, Surgical Treatment

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

References

[1] Gromova O.A., Torshin I.Yu., Limanova O.A. et al. Calcium and its synergists in supporting the structure of connective and bone tissue. The attending physician. 2014; 5: 69-76.

Google Scholar

[2] Baimagambetov S.A., Balgazarov A.S., Ramazanov Z.K., Markov A.A., Ponomarev A.A., Turgumbayeva R.K. Abdikarimov M.N. Modern models of endoprostheses and periprosthetic infection. Biomedical Research (India). 2018; 29: Iss.11.

DOI: 10.4066/biomedicalresearch.37-18-476

Google Scholar

[3] Doskina Ye.V. Current treatment options for patients with osteoporosis from the point of view of evidence-based medicine. Effective pharmacotherapy. 2013; 2: 34-40.

Google Scholar

[4] Markov A. Problems of the surgical treatment of patients with fractures of the proximal femur on the basis of osteoporosis. Sys. Rev. Pharm. 2019; 10(1): 143-145.

Google Scholar

[5] Ivanov S.N., Kocsis A.Yu., Sannikova E.V., Sudyakova M.Yu. et al. Attitude of orthopedic traumatologists to the problem of osteoporosis in Russia and their participation in its solution. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2016; 1 (79): 55-64.

DOI: 10.21823/2311-2905-2016-0-1-55-64

Google Scholar

[6] Lesnyak О.М., Baranova I.A., Belova K.Yu., Gladkova E.N. et al. Osteoporosis in the Russian Federation: epidemiology, medico-social and economic aspects of the problem (literature review). Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2018; 24(1):155-168.

DOI: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-1-155-168

Google Scholar

[7] Nikitinskaya O.A., Toroptsova N.V. Evaluation of the 10-year probability of osteoporotic fractures using the Russian FRAX model. Medical advice. 2017; (1S): 103-107.

DOI: 10.21518/2079-701x-2017-0-103-107

Google Scholar

[8] Gladkova E.N., Khodyrev V.N., Lesnyak O.M. Epidemiological study of osteoporotic fractures in residents of the Middle Urals of older age groups. Scientific and practical rheumatology. 2014; 52 (6): 643-649.

DOI: 10.14412/1995-4484-2014-643-649

Google Scholar

[9] Kogan P.G., Vorontsova T.N., Shubnyakov I.I., Voronkevich I.A. et al. The evolution of the treatment of fractures of the proximal humerus (literature review). Traumatology and orthopedics of Russia. 2013; 3 (69): 154-161.

DOI: 10.21823/2311-2905-2013--3-154-161

Google Scholar

[10] Gavrilov I.I., Brysuk G.P., Gaiduk M.V., Galyan A.V. et al. Osteosynthesis of fractures of the proximal humerus by plates with angular stability. Trauma. 2011; 3: 30-33.

Google Scholar

[11] Gupta A.K., Harris J.D., Erickson B.J., Abrams G.D. et al. Surgical management of complex proximal humerus fracturesa systematic review of 92 studies including 4500 patients. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2015; 29(1): 54-9.

DOI: 10.1097/bot.0000000000000229

Google Scholar

[12] Solberg B.D., Moon C.N., Franco D.P., Paiement G.D. Locked plating of 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fractures in older patients: the effect of initial fracture pattern on outcome. J. Orthop. Trauma. 2009; 23:113-9.

DOI: 10.1097/bot.0b013e31819344bf

Google Scholar

[13] Konrad G., Hirschmuller A., Audige L., Lambert S. Comparison of two different locking plates for two-, three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures –results of an international multicentre study. Int. Orthop. 2012; 36: 1051-8.

DOI: 10.1007/s00264-011-1410-8

Google Scholar

[14] Court-Broun С.M., Gard A., McQueen M.M. The translated two-part fracture of the proximal humerus. J. Bone Jt. Surg. 2001; 683-B: 799- 804.

Google Scholar

[15] Neer C.S. Displaced proximal humeral fractures. Part II. Treatment of three-part and fourpart displacement. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am.1970; 52(6):1090-1103.

DOI: 10.2106/00004623-197052060-00002

Google Scholar

[16] Parlato A., D Arienzo A., Ferruzza M., Galvano N. et al. Indications and limitations of the fixator TGF"Gex-Fix" in proximal end humeral fractures. Injury 2014; 45(Suppl. 6): S49-52.

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.023

Google Scholar

[17] Kloub M., Holub K., Polakova S. Nailing of three- and four-part fractures of the humeral Head – long-term results. Injury. 2014; 45(Suppl 1): S29-37.

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2013.10.038

Google Scholar

[18] Markov A. The Development of Dental Implant with the Bioactive Covering on the Basis of Synthetic Complex with Biogenic Elements. Sys. Rev. Pharm. 2020; 11(2): 278-283.

Google Scholar

[19] Rangan A., Handoll H., Brealey S., Jefferson L. PROFHER Trial Collaborators. Surgical vs nonsurgical treatment of adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus: the PROFHER randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;10: 313 (10):1037-47.

DOI: 10.1001/jama.2015.1629

Google Scholar

[20] Sudkamp N., Bayer J., Hepp P., Voigt C. et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures with use of the locking proximal humerus plate. Results of a prospective, multicenter, observational study. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 2009; 91(6):1320-8.

DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.h.00006

Google Scholar

[21] Mighell M.A., Kolm G.P., Collinge C.A., Frankle M.A. Outcomes of hemiarthroplasty for fractures of the proximal humerus. J. Shoulder. Elbow. Surg. 2003; 12: 569-577.

DOI: 10.1016/s1058-2746(03)00213-1

Google Scholar

[22] Neubauer Th., Wagner M., Hammerbauer Ch. Plates with angular stability LCP - new joint stock osteosynthesis standard. Bulletin of traumatology and orthopedics. 2003; 3: 27-35.

DOI: 10.17816/vto200310327-35

Google Scholar

[23] Hessmann M., Baumgaertel F., Gehling H., Klingelhoeffer I. Plate fixation of proximal humeral fractures with indirect reduction: surgical technique and results utilizing three shoulder scores. Injury 1999; 30: 453-62.

DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(99)00111-4

Google Scholar

[24] Boesmueller S., Wech M., Gregori M., Domaszewski F. et al. Risk factors for humeral head necrosis and non-union after plating in proximal humeral fractures. Injury. 2016; 47: 350-5.

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.10.001

Google Scholar

[25] Zirngibl B., Biber R., Bail H.J. Humeral head necrosis after proximal humeral nailing: what are the reasons for bad outcomes? Injury. 2016; 47: S10-S13.

DOI: 10.1016/s0020-1383(16)30847-6

Google Scholar

[26] Erasmo R., Guerra G., Guerra L. Fractures and fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus: a retrospective analysis of 82 cases treated with the Philos(®)locking plate. Injury. 2014; 45(6):43-8.

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.022

Google Scholar

[27] Sturzenegger M., Fornaro E., Jakob R.P. Results of surgical treatment of multifragmented fractures of the humeral head. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1982; 100: 249-59.

DOI: 10.1007/bf00381665

Google Scholar

[28] Cho C.H., Kim D.H., Kim B.S. Radiographic and clinical results of tension suture fixation using two washers with PHILOS plate for proximal humeral fractures. Injury. 2017; 48 (2): 464-468.

DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2016.11.030

Google Scholar

Scientific.Net is a registered brand of Trans Tech Publications Ltd
© 2024 by Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved