{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,3]],"date-time":"2026-10-03T03:12:55Z","timestamp":1790997175670,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":21,"publisher":"Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)","issue":"7","content-domain":{"domain":["lww.com","ovid.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]},"abstract":"\n OBJECTIVES:<\/jats:title>\n To compare clinical outcomes between open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with or without Conventus intramedullary cage (CC) for proximal humerus fractures.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n METHODS:<\/jats:title>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Design:<\/jats:title>\n Retrospective cohort study.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Setting:<\/jats:title>\n Level 1 trauma center.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Patient Selection Criteria:<\/jats:title>\n Included were patients who sustained OTA\/AO 11B and 11C fractures treated with ORIF with or without CC with minimum 1 year follow-up.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Outcome Measures and Comparisons:<\/jats:title>\n Primary outcomes included complication and reoperation rates. Secondary outcomes were American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Short Form 12 (SF-12) scores. Outcomes were compared between fixation strategies.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n RESULTS:<\/jats:title>\n \n Fifty-six patients were included, 33 ORIF and 23 CC, with mean follow-up of 5.0 (range 1.1\u201311.4) and 5.3 (range 2.3\u20137.6) years, respectively. The ORIF and CC groups were 27.3% and 21.7% men, respectively (\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.759). The ORIF group had a higher mean age (68.2 \u00b1 5.3 vs. 64.2 \u00b1 8.7 years,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.037). There was a higher proportion of OTA\/AO 11C fractures in the CC cohort (65.2% vs. 33%,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.029). CC group had a higher unplanned reoperation rate (18.2% vs. 34.8% for CC,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.158) and complication rate (24.2% vs. 39.1% for CC,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.233) that did not reach statistical significance within this available study population. Unplanned reoperations in the CC cohort included revision fixation (3) and conversion to hemiarthroplasty (2) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (3). There were no differences in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (mean 65.3 for ORIF and 63.1 for CC,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.773), physical SF-12 scores (mean 39.0 for ORIF and 42.1 for CC,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.342), and mental SF-12 scores (mean 50.3 for ORIF and 52.4 for CC,\n P<\/jats:italic>\n = 0.495) at final follow-up.\n <\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n CONCLUSIONS:<\/jats:title>\n OTA\/AO 11B and 11C proximal humerus fractures treated with Conventus intramedullary cage augmentation demonstrated a trend toward higher reoperation and complication rates than standard ORIF, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. Midterm patient-reported outcome scores were similar between cohorts, suggesting that Conventus intramedullary cage augmentation may not provide additional clinical benefit.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:<\/jats:title>\n Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1097\/bot.0000000000003161","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,13]],"date-time":"2026-02-13T14:08:44Z","timestamp":1770991724000},"page":"378-383","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/lww.0000000000001000","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Similar Outcomes in Proximal Humerus Fractures Treated With Conventus Intramedullary Cage Device and Open Reduction Internal Fixation"],"prefix":"10.1097","volume":"40","author":[{"given":"Sarah C.","family":"Kurkowski","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Eric R.","family":"Taleghani","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Paul","family":"McMillan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Eric G.","family":"Solomon","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Jonas E.","family":"Keller","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0009-0000-5208-892X","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Samuel K.","family":"Gerak","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH; and"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"John D.","family":"Wyrick","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Beacon Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, Cincinnati, OH."}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Brian M.","family":"Grawe","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH;"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"276","reference":[{"key":"R1-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"42","DOI":"10.5435\/JAAOS-D-15-00240","article-title":"Management of acute proximal humeral fractures","volume":"25","author":"Kancherla","year":"2017","journal-title":"J Am Acad Orthop Surg"},{"key":"R2-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"838","DOI":"10.5312\/wjo.v6.i10.838","article-title":"Operative vs non-operative management of displaced proximal humeral fractures in the elderly: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials","volume":"6","author":"Rabi","year":"2015","journal-title":"World J Orthop"},{"key":"R3-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1526","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2018.03.009","article-title":"Operative versus nonoperative treatment of proximal humeral fractures: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials","volume":"27","author":"Beks","year":"2018","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R4-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"676","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0b013e31815bb09d","article-title":"Analysis of efficacy and failure in proximal humerus fractures treated with locking plates","volume":"21","author":"Agudelo","year":"2007","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R5-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"66","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2010.01.001","article-title":"Use of locking plates in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures","volume":"19","author":"Ricchetti","year":"2010","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R6-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"163","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0b013e3181920e5b","article-title":"Open reduction and internal fixation of proximal humerus fractures using a proximal humeral locked plate: a prospective multicenter analysis","volume":"23","author":"Brunner","year":"2009","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R7-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"195","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0b013e31815b3922","article-title":"Indirect medial reduction and strut support of proximal humerus fractures using an endosteal implant","volume":"22","author":"Gardner","year":"2008","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R8-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"3300","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-011-1949-0","article-title":"Endosteal strut augment reduces complications associated with proximal humeral locking plates","volume":"469","author":"Neviaser","year":"2011","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"R9-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"338","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0000000000000012","article-title":"The impact of preoperative coronal plane deformity on proximal humerus fixation with endosteal augmentation","volume":"28","author":"Little","year":"2014","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R10-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1939","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2012.08.004","article-title":"Locking plate and fibular allograft augmentation in unstable fractures of proximal humerus","volume":"43","author":"Matassi","year":"2012","journal-title":"Injury"},{"key":"R11-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"889","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2014.10.019","article-title":"Geriatric proximal humeral fracture patients show similar clinical outcomes to non-geriatric patients after osteosynthesis with endosteal fibular strut allograft augmentation","volume":"24","author":"Hinds","year":"2015","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R12-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"927","DOI":"10.1007\/s00402-019-03142-6","article-title":"Cement augmentation of the proximal humerus internal locking system in elderly patients: a multicenter randomized controlled trial","volume":"139","author":"Hengg","year":"2019","journal-title":"Arch Orthop Trauma Surg"},{"key":"R13-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1326","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2018.12.001","article-title":"Screw-tip augmentation versus standard locked plating of displaced proximal humeral fractures: a retrospective comparative cohort study","volume":"28","author":"Siebenb\u00fcrger","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R14-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"741","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2011.09.017","article-title":"Fracture site augmentation with calcium phosphate cement reduces screw penetration after open reduction\u2013internal fixation of proximal humeral fractures","volume":"21","author":"Egol","year":"2012","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R15-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"S131","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2019.05.002","article-title":"Three- and 4-part proximal humeral fracture fixation with an intramedullary cage: 1-year clinical and radiographic outcomes","volume":"28","author":"Hudgens","year":"2019","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R16-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"2786","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2021.05.001","article-title":"Proximal humeral fractures treated with an intramedullary cage and plate: clinical and radiographic outcomes at a minimum of 1 year postoperatively","volume":"30","author":"Favorito","year":"2021","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R17-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"193","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0000000000001712","article-title":"Intramedullary cage fixation for proximal humerus fractures has low reoperation rates at 1 year: results of a multicenter study","volume":"34","author":"Goodnough","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R18-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"445","DOI":"10.1097\/BOT.0000000000002357","article-title":"Outcomes of locking plate fixation with spine cage for unstable proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients","volume":"36","author":"Cui","year":"2022","journal-title":"J Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"R19-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"587","DOI":"10.1067\/mse.2002.127096","article-title":"American shoulder and elbow surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness","volume":"11","author":"Michener","year":"2002","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"},{"key":"R20-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1443","DOI":"10.1016\/j.injury.2011.05.022","article-title":"Validity of outcome measures used to assess one and six month outcomes in orthopaedic trauma patients","volume":"42","author":"Gosling","year":"2011","journal-title":"Injury"},{"key":"R21-20260612","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"1843","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2020.01.077","article-title":"Analysis of early and late clinical and radiologic complications of proximal humeral fractures using open reduction, internal fixation, and intramedullary titanium cage augmentation","volume":"29","author":"Della Rotonda","year":"2020","journal-title":"J Shoulder Elbow Surg"}],"container-title":["Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/10.1097\/BOT.0000000000003161","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,6,12]],"date-time":"2026-06-12T13:00:29Z","timestamp":1781269229000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/journals.lww.com\/10.1097\/BOT.0000000000003161"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]},"references-count":21,"journal-issue":{"issue":"7","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2026]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/bot.0000000000003161","relation":{},"ISSN":["0890-5339","1531-2291"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0890-5339","type":"print"},{"value":"1531-2291","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2026,7]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2026-01-22","name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}