<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">N.N. Priorov Journal of Traumatology and Orthopedics</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">N.N. Priorov Journal of Traumatology and Orthopedics</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">0869-8678</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2658-6738</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Eco-Vector</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">634708</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.17816/vto634708</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="edn">CMUSCR</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>Original study articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>Оригинальные исследования</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">Surgical management of proximal humeral fractures</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Тактика оперативного лечения переломов проксимального отдела плечевой кости</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1933-1822</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">8960-7440</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Kesyan</surname><given-names>Gurgen A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Кесян</surname><given-names>Гурген Абавенович</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Dr. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>д-р мед. наук</p></bio><email>kesyan.gurgen@yandex.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3172-0161</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">6025-2377</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Karapetyan</surname><given-names>Grigoriy S.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Карапетян</surname><given-names>Григорий Сергеевич</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>канд. мед. наук</p></bio><email>dr.karapetian@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><contrib-id contrib-id-type="orcid">https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9028-3969</contrib-id><contrib-id contrib-id-type="spin">6125-1792</contrib-id><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Shuyskiy</surname><given-names>Artyom A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Шуйский</surname><given-names>Артём Анатольевич</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="RU">Russian Federation</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>MD, Cand. Sci. (Medicine)</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>канд. мед. наук</p></bio><email>shuj-artyom@mail.ru</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Priorov National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="preprint" iso-8601-date="2025-10-09" publication-format="electronic"><day>09</day><month>10</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2025-12-15" publication-format="electronic"><day>15</day><month>12</month><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>32</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en"/><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><fpage>752</fpage><lpage>762</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2024-07-30"><day>30</day><month>07</month><year>2024</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2025-09-02"><day>02</day><month>09</month><year>2025</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement xml:lang="en">Copyright ©; 2025, Eco-Vector</copyright-statement><copyright-statement xml:lang="ru">Copyright ©; 2025, Эко-Вектор</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2025</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Eco-Vector</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Эко-Вектор</copyright-holder><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" start_date="2026-12-15"/><license><ali:license_ref xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/</ali:license_ref></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journals.eco-vector.com/0869-8678/article/view/634708">https://journals.eco-vector.com/0869-8678/article/view/634708</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p><bold>BACKGROUND: </bold>Current clinical guidelines for the treatment of proximal humeral fractures standardize each case based solely on the type of injury. However, there is no systemic approach to the choice between performing humeral osteosynthesis or shoulder arthroplasty, based on a comprehensive assessment of objective diagnostic criteria.</p> <p><bold>AIM: </bold>The work aimed to develop a diagnostic algorithm with the aim of enabling a differentiated approach to the surgical treatment of proximal humeral fractures.</p> <p><bold>METHODS: </bold>This pilot, single-center, cohort, retrospective, observational study with a complete sample compared quantitative and qualitative data from two groups of patients. Outcomes of 50 patients with proximal metaepiphyseal humeral fractures treated surgically between 2019 and 2022 were analyzed. All patients underwent multislice computed tomography of the shoulder joint. Computed tomography data were used to calculate Hounsfield units of the humeral fracture fragments. Prognostically, Hounsfield units values below 65, corresponding to significant reduction in bone density due to regional or systemic osteoporosis, indicated a poor outlook for osteosynthesis, with elevated risks of implant instability, secondary fragment displacement, and nonunion of the fracture site. In cases with satisfactory bone density values, osteosynthesis techniques for humeral fractures were applied. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty was performed in patients with fractures unsuitable for reconstruction. Functional, clinical, and radiological outcomes of surgical treatment were assessed in both groups. Functional and clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire.</p> <p><bold>RESULTS: </bold>Retrospective follow-up showed no adverse osteosynthesis outcomes such as nonunion or avascular necrosis of the fragments. No purulent-inflammatory complications occurred. Fracture consolidation was achieved, and favorable functional outcomes were observed in all patients treated with either osteosynthesis or shoulder joint arthroplasty.</p> <p><bold>CONCLUSION:</bold><bold> </bold>Measurement of Hounsfield units of bone fragments represents an objective quantitative criterion for assessing bone tissue density and predicting the feasibility of humeral fracture osteosynthesis.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p><bold>Обоснование. </bold>Существующие клинические рекомендации по лечению переломов проксимального отдела плечевой кости стандартизируют каждый случай, основываясь на типе полученной травмы. Системного подхода к выбору проведения остеосинтеза плечевой кости либо эндопротезирования плечевого сустава при переломах, основанного на комплексной оценке объективных диагностических критериев, не существует.</p> <p><bold>Цель. </bold>Разработка алгоритма диагностических мероприятий с целью дифференцированного подхода к хирургическому лечению при оперативном лечении переломов плечевой кости.</p> <p><bold>Материалы и методы. </bold>Настоящее исследование является пилотным, одноцентровым, когортным, ретроспективным, наблюдательным со сплошной выборкой, со сравнением количественных и качественных данных двух групп пациентов. Производилось изучение результатов лечения 50 пациентов с переломами проксимального метаэпифиза плечевой кости, оперированных в период с 2019 по 2022 год. Всем пациентам выполнялась мультиспиральная компьютерная томография плечевого сустава. По данным компьютерной томографии производился расчёт единиц Хаунсфилда отломков плечевой кости. Прогностически при показателях единиц Хаунсфилда ниже 65, что соответствует выраженному снижению костной плотности отломков и регионарному / системному остеопорозу, остеосинтез может быть неперспективен, повышены риски нестабильности металлоконструкции, вторичного смещения отломков, несращения зоны перелома. При удовлетворительных показателях плотности костной ткани применялись методики остеосинтеза переломов плечевой кости. Реверсивное эндопротезирование плечевого сустава выполнялось пациентам с неперспективными для реконструкции переломами. Оценивались функциональные, клинические и рентгенологические результаты хирургического лечения обеих групп пациентов. Функциональные и клинические результаты оценивали по вопроснику The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH).</p> <p><bold>Результаты. </bold>По результатам ретроспективного наблюдения лечения пациентов таких неблагоприятных исходов остеосинтеза, как несращение отломков и их асептический некроз, не наблюдалось. Гнойно-воспалительных осложнений не было. Достигнута консолидация переломов, получены хорошие функциональные результаты у всех пациентов, которым выполнялись остеосинтез и эндопротезирование плечевого сустава.</p> <p><bold>Заключение. </bold>Измерение единиц Хаунсфилда отломков является объективным количественным критерием для оценки плотности костной ткани и прогнозирования перспектив остеосинтеза переломов.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>osteoporosis</kwd><kwd>shoulder joint</kwd><kwd>osteosynthesis</kwd><kwd>reverse arthroplasty</kwd><kwd>Hounsfield units</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>остеопороз</kwd><kwd>плечевой сустав</kwd><kwd>остеосинтез</kwd><kwd>реверсивное эндопротезирование</kwd><kwd>единицы Хаунсфилда</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group/></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>Prokhorenko VM, Afanasiev YuA. Surgical treatment of intra-articular fractures of the proximal humerus. Acta Biomedica Scientifica. 2023;8(5):192–202. doi: 10.29413/ABS.2023-8.5.21 EDN: CATNHX</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>Kostiv RE, Kostiv EP, Shulepin IV, Kostiva EE. Surgical treatment of patients with polyfocal fractures of the proximal humerus on the background of osteoporosis. Pacific medical journal. 2022;(2):82–85. doi: 10.34215/1609-1175-2022-2-82-85 EDN: RGHECU</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>Cooke HL, Gabig AM, Karzon AL, et al. The surgical treatment of proximal humerus fractures 2010–2019: United States national case volume and incidence trends. JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques. 2023;4(2):146–152. doi: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2023.02.009</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>Kesyan GA, Karapetyan GS, Shuyskiy AA. Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: From Simple to Complex. Moscow: Megapolis; 2023. 104 p. (In Russ.) EDN: RPAQWP</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>Kesyan GA, Karapetyan GS, Shuyskiy AA, et al. Diagnostics and methods of solving the reduction of bone mineral density and deformities of the articular cavity of the scapula during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Biomedica Scientifica. 2022;7(1):154–160. doi: 10.29413/ABS.2022-7.1.18 EDN: ILIBXL</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS, Karam MD, Kellam JF. Fracture and Dislocation Classification Compendium-2018. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2018;32(Suppl 1):S1–S170. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001063</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>Liu G, Li L, Yang C, et al. Hounsfield units predicts the occurrence but not the patterns of proximal humerus fracture in the elderly patients. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2023;24(1):342. doi: 10.1186/s12891-023-06442-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>Lund EA, Samtani R, Winston M, et al. Association of Perioperative Computed Tomography Hounsfield Units and Failure of Femoral Neck Fracture Fixation. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2020;34(12):632–638. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001843</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>Kim H, Lee W, Choi S, et al. Role of Additional Inferomedial Supporting Screws in Osteoporotic 3-Part Proximal Humerus Fracture: Finite Element Analysis. Geriatric Orthopaedic Surgery &amp; Rehabilitation. 2020;11:2151459320956958. doi: 10.1177/2151459320956958</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>Earp BE, Kallini JR, Collins JE, et al. Correlation of Hounsfield Unit Measurements on Computed Tomography of the Shoulder With Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry Scans and Fracture Risk Assessment Tool Scores: A Potential for Opportunistic Screening. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2021;35(7):384–390. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001994</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>Lungren MP, Evans MRB, Huri G, et al. Shoulder Arthroplasty: The Shoulder Club Guide. In: Shoulder Arthroplasty. Springer; 2020. P. 210.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>Ruedi TP, Buckley RE, Moran CG. AO Principles of Fracture Management. 2nd ed. New York: Thieme; 2007. 947 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>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. 2021;45(7):1811–1816. doi: 10.1007/s00264-021-04967-w</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>Doursounian L, Kilinc A, Cherrier B, Nourissat G. Complex Proximal Humeral Fractures: A Prospective Study of 22 Cases Treated Using the “Bilboquet” Device. Orthopaedics &amp; Traumatology: Surgery &amp; Research. 2011;97(1):58–66. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2010.06.015</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>Lazarev AF, Solod EI. Osteosynthesis for fractures of humerus neck in elderly patients. N.N. Priorov Journal of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2003;10(3):57–61. doi: 10.17816/vto200310357-61 EDN: OITEEP</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>Buch B, Vall M, Consigliere P, et al. Short Stems and Stemless Shoulder Arthroplasty: Current Concepts Review. Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2022;10(8):633–647. doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2021.53555.2664</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>Kesyan GA, Urazgil’deev RZ, Karapetyan GS, et al. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in complex clinical cases. Vestnik of the Smolensk State Medical Academy. 2019;18(4):111–120. EDN: YKPBHV</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
