The medial periosteal hinge, a key structure in fractures of the proximal humerus: a biomechanical cadaver study of its mechanical properties.

The medial periosteal hinge plays a key role in fractures of the head of the humerus, offering mechanical support during and after reduction and maintaining perfusion of the head by the vessels in the posteromedial periosteum. We have investigated the biomechanical properties of the medial periosteum in fractures of the proximal humerus using a standard model in 20 fresh-frozen cadaver specimens comparable in age, gender and bone mineral density. After creating the fracture, we displaced the humeral head medial or lateral to the shaft with controlled force until complete disruption of the posteromedial periosteum was recorded. As the quality of periosteum might be affected by age and bone quality, the results were correlated with the age and the local bone mineral density of the specimens measured with quantitative CT. Periosteal rupture started at a mean displacement of 2.96 mm (SD 2.92) with a mean load of 100.9 N (SD 47.1). The mean maximum load of 111.4 N (SD 42.5) was reached at a mean displacement of 4.9 mm (SD 4.2). The periosteum was completely ruptured at a mean displacement of 34.4 mm (SD 11.1). There was no significant difference in the mean distance to complete rupture for medial (mean 35.8 mm (SD 13.8)) or lateral (mean 33.0 mm (SD 8.2)) displacement (p = 0.589). The mean bone mineral density was 0.111 g/cm(3) (SD 0.035). A statistically significant but low correlation between bone mineral density and the maximum load uptake (r = 0.475, p = 0.034) was observed. This study showed that the posteromedial hinge is a mechanical structure capable of providing support for percutaneous reduction and stabilisation of a fracture by ligamentotaxis. Periosteal rupture started at a mean of about 3 mm and was completed by a mean displacement of just under 35 mm. The microvascular situation of the rupturing periosteum cannot be investigated with the current model.

[1]  H. Resch,et al.  Minimally-invasive treatment of three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[2]  R. L. Carvalho,et al.  A mechanical comparison between conventional and modified angular plates for proximal humeral fractures. , 2008, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[3]  P. Rommens,et al.  Osteosynthese am proximalen Humerus mittels winkelstabiler Platte oder Doppelplatte: eine vergleichende biomechanische Untersuchung / Angle-fixed plate fixation or double-plate osteosynthesis in fractures of the proximal humerus: a biomechanical study , 2008, Biomedizinische Technik. Biomedical engineering.

[4]  G. Njus,et al.  Pullout strength and load to failure properties of self-tapping cortical screws in synthetic and cadaveric environments representative of healthy and osteoporotic bone. , 2008, The Journal of trauma.

[5]  R. Gupta Two-Part Surgical Neck Fractures of the Proximal Part of the Humerus: A Biomechanical Evaluation of Two Fixation Techniques , 2008 .

[6]  M. Blauth,et al.  Influence of osteoporosis on fracture fixation - a systematic literature review , 2008, Osteoporosis International.

[7]  L. Prantl,et al.  Proximal humerus fractures: a comparative biomechanical analysis of intra and extramedullary implants , 2007, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[8]  A. Schneeberger Treatment of anterior fracture-dislocations of the proximal humerus by open reduction and internal fixation , 2007 .

[9]  Edward Harvey,et al.  Biomechanical comparison of a unique locking plate versus a standard plate for internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures in a cadaveric model. , 2006, Clinical biomechanics.

[10]  J. Koebke,et al.  The arteries of the humeral head and their relevance in fracture treatment , 2005, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[11]  J. Goldhahn,et al.  Mechanical behavior of screws in normal and osteoporotic bone , 2005, Osteoporosis International.

[12]  E Schneider,et al.  Effect of cortical thickness and cancellous bone density on the holding strength of internal fixator screws , 2004, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[13]  M. Leunig,et al.  Predictors of humeral head ischemia after intracapsular fracture of the proximal humerus. , 2004, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[14]  G. Duda,et al.  Proximal humeral fractures: how stiff should an implant be? , 2003, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[15]  H. Resch,et al.  Percutaneous Treatment of Proximal Humeral Fractures , 2003 .

[16]  L. Bigliani,et al.  Fractures of the Shoulder Girdle , 2003 .

[17]  H. Resch,et al.  Minimally invasive reduction and osteosynthesis of articular fractures of the humeral head. , 2001, Injury.

[18]  H. Resch,et al.  Reconstruction of the valgus-impacted humeral head fracture. , 1995, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[19]  C. H. Brooks,et al.  Vascularity of the humeral head after proximal humeral fractures. An anatomical cadaver study. , 1993, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[20]  R. Jakob,et al.  [Compound fractures of the proximal humerus]. , 1987, Der Orthopade.