4.0 Review

Proximal humerus fractures in the pediatric population: a systematic review

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHILDRENS ORTHOPAEDICS
Volume 5, Issue 3, Pages 187-194

Publisher

BRITISH EDITORIAL SOC BONE JOINT SURGERY
DOI: 10.1007/s11832-011-0328-4

Keywords

Proximal humerus fracture; Children; Operative and non-operative

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Proximal humerus fractures and epiphyseal separations in skeletally immature children and adolescents are traditionally treated non-operatively. Recently, authors have described the operative fixation of these injuries, particularly in older children and adolescents with displaced fractures. We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify operative indications for proximal humerus fractures in children and to compare the results by age, displacement, and treatment modality. Methods A systematic review of the literature from January 1960 to April 2010 was performed. All studies with patients under the age of 18 years who were treated for a proximal humerus fracture either operatively or non-operatively were included. Results The available literature is largely composed of uncontrolled case series (Level IV). According to findings, the literature shows that asymptomatic union is the rule in proximal humerus fractures in children and adolescents. Poorer outcomes were noted in operatively treated patients, patients with more displaced fractures, and older patients. Conclusions The currently available literature supports a non-operative treatment approach, particularly in younger children with more growth remaining. Older patients (>13 years) with more widely displaced fractures may benefit from anatomic reduction with stabilization, though the data in the literature at this point is too weak to strongly recommend this approach. Further analysis with a more rigorous scientific method is necessary to evaluate the optimum treatment modality in this subgroup.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available