Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery - 2026-04-06 - Journal Article
External fixation versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures in the elderly: a retrospective comparative study.
Vadalà A, Benelli C, Suraci F, Carta B, Baldassari G, Maffulli N
Topics
Key Takeaway
External fixation and RSA yield equivalent Constant-Murley Scores (58.4 vs. 55.2, p=0.42) for Neer 2- and 3-part proximal humerus fractures in patients aged 65-80, but EF produces superior external rotation (60.9° vs. 46.5°, p<0.01) with shorter operative time (48.2 vs. 92.4 min) and zero transfusion requirement.
Summary Depth
Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.
Summary
This retrospective comparative study asked whether biologically driven external fixation produces non-inferior functional outcomes compared to RSA in patients aged 65-80 with displaced Neer 2- or 3-part proximal humerus fractures treated between 2015 and 2022. CMS, SST, ASES, Quick-DASH, and ROM were assessed at final follow-up. Functional scores were statistically equivalent across all PRO instruments, but EF yielded significantly better external rotation (60.9° vs. 46.5°, p<0.01), shorter operative time (48.2 vs. 92.4 min, p<0.001), and no transfusions versus 12.1% in the RSA group.
Key Limitation
Mean follow-up duration is not specified, making it impossible to determine whether the functional equivalence between EF and RSA is maintained beyond the short term or whether late complications (pin-site infection, malunion, implant loosening) diverge over time.
Original Abstract
BACKGROUND
The optimal management of displaced proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) in the elderly remains a subject of ongoing debate. This study aims to compare the clinical and functional outcomes of biologically driven external fixation (EF) versus functional joint replacement via reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in patients aged 65-80 years.
METHODS
A retrospective comparative study was conducted on patients with displaced Neer two- or three-part PHFs treated between 2015 and 2022. The final analysis included 67 patients: Group A (EF; n=34) and Group B (RSA; n=33). Clinical and functional outcomes were quantified using the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Quick-DASH) score, and Range of Motion (ROM) assessment. Patient satisfaction was evaluated via a 5-point Likert scale.
RESULTS
Both cohorts were homogeneous regarding mean age (72.2 ± 3.5 vs. 73.4 ± 3.8 years). Group A demonstrated significantly shorter mean operative times (48.2 ± 10.5 vs. 92.4 ± 15.2 min; p < 0.001) and a lower requirement for blood transfusions (0% vs. 12.1%; p < 0.05). At the final follow-up, both cohorts achieved comparable CMS (58.4 ± 8.2 vs. 55.2 ± 10.1; p = 0.42), SST (7.6 ± 1.5 vs. 7.0 ± 1.4; p = 0.38), and ASES scores (69 ± 7.8 vs. 65 ± 9.4; p = 0.51). Group A exhibited significantly superior external rotation (60.9° ± 9.2° vs. 46.5° ± 10.1°; p < 0.01) and a trend toward better internal rotation (49° ± 16.2° vs. 42° ± 17.1°; p = 0.09). Subjective satisfaction was comparable (Likert score: 3.2 ± 0.8 vs. 2.9 ± 0.9; p = 0.16). The overall complication rate was 20.6% in Group A and 12.1% in Group B (p = 0.51).
CONCLUSIONS
Both EF and RSA are effective for managing PHFs in the elderly, yielding similar functional outcomes. However, EF represents a significantly less invasive, "bio-friendly" alternative, offering shorter surgical duration, no transfusion risk, and superior restoration of physiological rotations. The preservation of native anatomy and high patient satisfaction support EF as a viable treatment option in the geriatric population .
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.