Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of “Bilboquet” device and locking plate for surgical treatment of proximal humerus complex fractures at two years follow-up

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Surgical treatment of three or four part fractures of the proximal humerus is complex. Different conservative techniques have been described. The main goal of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of Bilboquet and locking plate at two year follow-up.

Methods

This is a retrospective, comparative study, with a continuous series of 41 patients. Bony fixation was achieved with a Bilboquet device in 22 patients or a locking plate in 19 patients. Patient evaluation included clinical data: shoulder range of motion, Constant–Murley shoulder score and DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score, and imaging using standard shoulder X-rays.

Results

Of the 41 patients included, 1 patient was lost to follow-up in the locking plate group. At a mean follow-up of 24 months patients in Bilboquet group showed a Constant score higher than in locking plate (p = 0.02). Range of motion and DASH score were not significantly different between the two groups. avascular necrosis occured in three patients of Bilboquet group (14%) versus in two patients in the locking plate group (11%) (p > 0.5). Complication and reintervention rate were non-significantly higher in the locking plate group than in the Bilboquet group (37 vs 14%).

Conclusion

Bilboquet and locking plate give good functional outcomes in complex proximal humerus fractures. However, the Bilboquet device appears to provide better functional results than locking plate at mid-term follow-up.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lanting B, MacDermid J, Drosdowech D, Faber KJ (2008) Proximal humeral fractures : A systematic review of treatment modalities. J Shoulder Elb Surg 17(1):42–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.03.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Stableforth PG (1984) Four-part fractures of the neck of the humerus. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Br Vol 66(1):104–108

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Akalın Y, Şahin İG, Çevik N, Güler BO, Avci Ö, Öztürk A (2020) Locking compression plate fixation versus intramedullary nailing of humeral shaft fractures: Which one is better? A single-centre prospective randomized study. Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04696-6

  4. Doursounian L, Grimberg J, Cazeau C, Jos E, Touzard RC (2000) A new internal fixation technique for fractures of the proximal humerus--the Bilboquet device : A report on 26 cases. J Shoulder Elb Surg 9(4):279–288. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2000.106086

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nowak LL, Dehghan N, McKee MD, Schemitsch EH (2018) Plate fixation for management of humerus fractures. Injury 49(Suppl 1):S33–S38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-1383(18)30300-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Thanasas C, Kontakis G, Angoules A, Limb D, Giannoudis P (2009) Treatment of proximal humerus fractures with locking plates: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18(6):837–844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Doursounian L, Kilinc A, Cherrier B, Nourissat G (2011) Complex proximal humeral fractures : A prospective study of 22 cases treated using the « Bilboquet » device. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res: OTSR 97(1):58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2010.06.015

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Doursounian L, Le Sant A, Mauprivez R, Miquel A, Beauthier-Landauer V (2016) Open reduction and internal fixation of three- and four-part proximal humeral fractures by intra-focal distraction : Observational study of twenty five cases. Int Orthop 40(11):2373–2382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3109-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Neer CS (2002) Four-segment classification of proximal humeral fractures : Purpose and reliable use. J Shoulder Elb Surg 11(4):389–400. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2002.124346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C (1996) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure : The DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 29(6):602–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Maier D, Jaeger M, Izadpanah K, Strohm PC, Suedkamp NP (2014) Proximal humeral fracture treatment in adults. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. Am Vol 96(3):251–261. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Soliman OA, Koptan WMT (2013) Four-part fracture dislocations of the proximal humerus in young adults : Results of fixation. Injury 44(4):442–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2012.09.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chen L, Xing F, Xiang Z (2016) Effectiveness and safety of interventions for treating adults with displaced proximal humeral fracture : A Network Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review. PLoS One 11(11):e0166801. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0166801

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Roberson TA, Bentley JC, Griscom JT, Kissenberth MJ, Tolan SJ, Hawkins RJ, Tokish JM (2017) Outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years : A systematic review. J Shoulder Elb Surg 26(7):1298–1306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.12.069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Valenti P, Zampeli F, Ciais G, Kany J, Katz D (2020) The initial treatment of complex proximal humerus fracture affects the outcome of revision with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Int Orthop 44(7):1331–1340. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04612-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sun Q, Wu X, Wang L, Cai M (2020) The plate fixation strategy of complex proximal humeral fractures. Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04544-7

  18. Südkamp N, Bayer J, Hepp P, Voigt C, Oestern H, Kääb M, Luo C, Plecko M, Wendt K, Köstler W, Konrad G (2009) 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 91(6):1320–1328. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Brunner F, Sommer C, Bahrs C, Heuwinkel R, Hafner C, Rillmann P, Kohut G, Ekelund A, Muller M, Audigé L, Babst R (2009) Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures using a proximal humeral locked plate : A prospective multicenter analysis. J Orthop Trauma 23(3):163–172. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181920e5b

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hirschmann MT, Fallegger B, Amsler F, Regazzoni P, Gross T (2011) Clinical longer-term results after internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures with a locking compression plate (PHILOS). J Orthop Trauma 25(5):286–293. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0b013e3181f2b20e

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Erasmo R, Guerra G, Guerra L (2014) Fractures and fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus : A retrospective analysis of 82 cases treated with the Philos(®) locking plate. Injury 45(Suppl 6):S43–S48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2014.10.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M, Leunig M (2004) Predictors of humeral head ischemia after intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elb Surg 13(4):427–433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.01.034

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Département de chirurgie orthopédique et traumatologie, Hopital Saint Antoine, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris, France

    Yaniv Bismuth, Adeline Cambon-Binder, Alain Sautet & Levon Doursounian

  2. Département de chirurgie orthopédique et traumatologie, Hopital Avicenne, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Bobigny, France

    Thomas Gregory

  3. Département de chirurgie orthopédique et traumatologie, Hopital Henri-Mondor, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Créteil, France

    Claire Bastard

Authors
  1. Yaniv Bismuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adeline Cambon-Binder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alain Sautet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Levon Doursounian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas Gregory
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Claire Bastard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Yaniv Bismuth, Adeline Cambon-Binder, Alain Sautet, Levon Doursounian, and Thomas Gregory. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Claire Bastard, and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claire Bastard.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

We declare that we have no conflicts of interest in the authorship or publication of this contribution.

Ethical approval

This retrospective chart review study involving human participants was in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to publish

Patients signed informed consent regarding publishing their data and photographs.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Level of evidence: IV

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bismuth, Y., Cambon-Binder, A., Sautet, A. et al. Comparison of “Bilboquet” device and locking plate for surgical treatment of proximal humerus complex fractures at two years follow-up. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 45, 1811–1816 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-04967-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-04967-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation