Cement augmentation for proximal humerus fractures: a meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies.

INTRODUCTION

It is unclear if elderly patients treated with plate osteosynthesis for proximal humerus fractures benefit from cement augmentation. This meta-analysis aims to compare cement augmentation to no augmentation regarding healing, complications, and functional results.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized clinical trials and observational studies. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. The primary outcome is overall complication rate. Stratified analyses were performed for types of complication (implant-related or systemic). Secondary outcomes include re-interventions, hospital stay, operation time, functional scores, and general quality of life.

RESULTS

Five observational studies and one randomized controlled trial with a total of 541 patients were included. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the augmented group (15.6% versus 25.4%, OR 0.54 (95%CI 0.33-0.87)). This was caused by a reduction of implant-related complications (10.4% vs. 19.9%, OR 0.49 (95%CI 0.28, 0.88)). No difference in humeral head necrosis was found. Data on re-intervention, hospital stay, and operation time was limited but did not show significant differences. No impact on functional scores and general quality of life was detected.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that cement augmentation may reduce overall complications, mainly by preventing implant-related complications. No difference was detected regarding need for re-intervention, functional scores, general quality of life, and hospital stay. This is the first meta-analysis on this topic. It remains to be seen whether conclusions will hold when more and better-quality data becomes available.