Skip to main content
Log in

Le fratture dell’estremo prossimale dell’omero: incidenza e classificazioni

Fractures of the proximal humerus: Incidence and classification

  • Aggiornamenti
  • Published:
LO SCALPELLO-OTODI Educational

Abstract

Fractures of the proximal humerus are common and their incidence increases with age and, consequently, with the degree of osteoporosis. Over time, many classification systems regarding these fractures have been proposed. The aim of classification is to define a fracture on the basis of fixed parameters (morphologic characteristics and fracture pathoanatomy) that can be used for better understanding of fracture severity, prognosis and potential surgical options. Most classifications are based on the X-ray appearance of the humeral head fracture on plain films; recently 3D-CT scans have complemented traditional radiograms. Neer developed a classification system based on fracture pathoanatomy and on the presence or absence of displacement of one or more of the four major bony segments (surgical neck, anatomic neck, greater and lesser tuberosity). The AO classification system included the concept of perfusion of the articular segment. Edelson divided humeral head fractures into five basic types that correspond to some degree to the Neer classification, but differ significantly regarding the most complex patterns of fracture. Furthermore, an interobserver reliability study indicated the improved usefulness of the 3-D concept in providing a common language among clinicians for classifying these injuries. Finally, Hertel developed a classification system for better understanding the predictors of humeral head ischemia. In conclusion, a fracture must be classified for understanding its severity and guiding the treatment. Radiographies are often not sufficient for establishing the number of fragments and the entity of their dislocation. 3D-CT scans allow medial hinge condition and other predictors of humeral head ischemia to be better understood.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliografia

  1. Baron JA, Barrett JA, Karagas MR (1996) The epidemiology of peripheral fractures. Bone 18[Suppl 3]:209–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bengnér U, Johnell O, Redlund-Johnell I (1988) Changes in the incidence of fracture of the upper end of the humerus during a 30-year period. A study of 2125 fractures. Clin Orthop 231:179–182

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Rose SH, Melton LJ 3rd, Morrey BF et al (1982) Epidemiologic features of humeral fractures. Clin Orthop 168:24–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Horak J, Nilsson B (1975) Epidemiology of fracture of the upper end of the humerus. Clin Orthop 112:250–253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Neer CS 2nd, Rockwood CA Jr (1984) Fractures and dislocations of the shoulder. In: Rockwood CA, Green DP (Eds.) Fractures, 2nd edn. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia pp 675–707

    Google Scholar 

  6. Giannicola G, Gumina S, Cinotti G, Postacchini F (1998) Riproducibilità ed utilità clinica della classificazione di Neer nelle fratture e fratture lussazioni dell’estremo prossimale dell’omero. Giornale Italiano di Ortopedia e Traumatologia 24:323–332

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kocher T (1986) Beitrage zur Kenntnis einiger praktisch wichtiger fracturenfermen. Carl Sallman Verlag, Basel

    Google Scholar 

  8. Codman EA (1934) The shoulder. T. Todd, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dehen E (1945) Fractures of the upper end of the humerus: a classification based on the etiology of trauma. Surg Clin North Am 25:28–47

    Google Scholar 

  10. Laing PG (1956) The arterial supply to the adult humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 38:1105–1116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Neer CS 2nd (1970) Displaced proximal humeral fractures. I. Classification and evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:1077–1089

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Neer CS 2nd (1970) Displaced proximal humeral fractures. II. Treatment of three-part and four-part displacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 52:1090–1103

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Neer CS 2nd (2002) Four-segment classification of proximal humeral fractures: purpose and reliable use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11:389–400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Neer CS 2nd (1990) Shoulder reconstruction, 1st edn. Saunders, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gumina S, Giannicola G, Cinotti G et al (1998) Confronto tra due classificazioni delle fratture dell’epifisi prossimale di omero: Neer e AO-ASIF.Giornale Italiano di Ortopedia e Traumatologia 24:435–442

    Google Scholar 

  16. Bernstein J, Adler LM, Blank JE et al (1996) Evaluation of the Neer system of classification of proximal humeral fractures with computerized tomographic scans and plain radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78:1371–1375

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Sallay PI, Pedowitz RA, Mallon WJ et al (1997) Reliability and reproducibility of radiographic interpretation of proximal humeral fracture pathoanatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 6:60–69

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jakob RP, Kristiansen T, Mayo K (1984) Classification and aspect of treatment of fractures of the proximal humerus. In: Bateman JE, Welsh RP (Eds.) Surgery of the Sshoulder. Decker, Philadelphia pp 330–343

    Google Scholar 

  19. Muller ME, Nazarian S, Koch P, Schatzker J (1990) The comprehensive classification of fractures of the long bones. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  20. Marsh JL, Slongo TF, Agel J et al (2007) Fracture and dislocation classification compendium — 2007: Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification, database and outcomes committee. J Orthop Trauma 21[Suppl 10]:1–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Edelson G, Kelly I, Vigder F, Reis ND (2004) A three-dimensional classification for fractures of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:413–425

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tingart MJ, Apreleva M, von Stechow D et al (2003) The cortical thickness of the proximal humeral diaphysis predicts bone mineral density of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:611–617

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hertel R, Hempfing A, Stiehler M, Leunig M (2004) Predictors of humeral head ischemia after intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13:427–433

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gumina, S., Rita, A., Arceri, V. et al. Le fratture dell’estremo prossimale dell’omero: incidenza e classificazioni. LO SCAL 23, 2–7 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-009-0014-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-009-0014-1

Navigation