Scapular Spine Fracture: Open Reduction, Internal Fixation—Single and Dual Plating
Julie Glener
Dan Schodlbauer
Jonathan C. Levy
INDICATIONS
As the literature has evolved, the specific location of acromion and scapular spine fractures (ASFs) has become an increasingly important aspect in determining a treatment algorithm for this injury. The Levy Classification (Figure 7-1) was first reported in 2013,1 which focused on the origin of the deltoid and divided fractures into three zones. A modification of this classification system was introduced in 2022 where regions of the type II zone were subclassified based upon observed clustering of fractures2 (Figure 7-2). Type I fractures were defined as fractures through the mid part of the lateral acromion, involving a portion of the anterior and middle deltoid origins. Type IIA fractures were defined as fractures lateral to the glenoid face involving at least the entire middle deltoid origin and at least a portion but not all of the posterior deltoid origin. A type IIB fracture was defined as a fracture in line with the glenoid face involving the entire middle deltoid with a portion but not all of the posterior deltoid origin. A type IIC fracture was defined as a fracture medial to the glenoid face, involving at least the entire middle deltoid with a portion of the posterior deltoid origin. Type III fractures were defined as fractures at the base of the acromion spine involving the entire middle and posterior deltoid origins.1,2
More recent analysis using 3D CT reconstruction of fractures has identified four distinct clusters of post reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) ASFs corresponding to Levy types I, IIA, IIB, and III (Figure 7-3). This analysis further helped to identify the fracture patterns in addition to the clustering of fracture locations. Type I fractures involve the lateral acromion and demonstrate variable fracture patterning but are often in line with the acromioclavicular joint. Type IIA fractures are typically oblique and cluster around the transition between the acromion and scapular spine. Type IIB fractures are typically transverse and cluster in line with the level of the glenoid baseplate. Lastly, type III fractures are typically oblique occurring along the base of the scapular spine sometimes with extension into the scapular body.
Location of fracture has been shown to significantly influence the outcome of nonsurgical treatment. Boltuch et al observed a dichotomy among fractures based on location relative to the glenoid face in which medial fractures (Levy types IIB, IIC, and III) displayed inferior outcomes with nonsurgical management compared with matched controls who did not sustain an ASF, while lateral fractures (Levy types I and IIA) exhibited minimal impact on outcomes (Figure 7-4).2 In discussion of these findings, the authors recommended that operative intervention be considered in patients with fractures medial to the glenoid face (Levy types IIB, IIC, and III).2 Our current recommendation is to manage fractures medial to the glenoid face with surgical intervention, based upon these findings. Surgical management of lateral fractures that are painful and may limit motion remains justified.
CONTRAINDICATIONS
Relative contraindications to surgical management of acromion fractures include insufficient bone to support fixation, active infection, and neurological injury to the glenohumeral joint. There are examples where these relative contraindications would still support surgical management where pain from the fracture dictates the indication for intervention.
PREOPERATIVE PREPARATION
Prior to deciding the best management for a scapular spine fracture, a high level of suspicion is required to diagnose this injury and localize the fracture zone. This begins with a careful history and physical examination. In the case of an ASF following reverse shoulder arthroplasty, there is often an acute change in function with pain localized along the acromion and/or scapular spine. Palpation along the bone surfaces and surrounding soft tissue can help localize the suspected area of fracture and facilitate a more focused area of imaging. Often, motion at the fracture site can be palpated during attempted shoulder elevation.
Classically, patients at high risk for scapular spine fractures are older aged, female, those with a history of self-reported osteoporosis or inflammatory arthritis, and patients whose indication for reverse shoulder arthroplasty was rotator cuff arthropathy, chronic anterior dislocation, or fracture nonunion/malunion.1,3 Often, patients present with a history of acute pain after a fall or sudden movement. In patients with a native glenohumeral joint, scapular spine fractures may be seen as a consequence of rotator cuff tear arthropathy. In normal shoulders, these fractures are frequently associated with a high-energy mechanism, most commonly motor vehicle accidents, and usually occur alongside other severe injuries or scapular fractures.4 On examination, tenderness to palpation along the acromion and/or scapular spine is characteristic, and patients commonly experience pain and/or difficulty with active arm abduction and elevation.
In cases of suspected fracture, it is recommended to obtain a 4-view radiographic series including anteroposterior, Grashey, axillary lateral, and scapular-Y views. The axillary lateral view is the most helpful while assessing the location of the fracture,5 and attention must be given to ensure the view captures the entire scapula in an effort to avoid missing medial fractures. The series should be compared with immediate postoperative radiographs, as a change in acromion-to-greater tuberosity distance may be indicative of the acromion tilting inferiorly as a result of fracture. This may be subtle and the only radiographic sign of fracture. Throughout the diagnostic workup of clinically suspected ASFs, it is crucial to recognize that plain radiographs have been demonstrated to be unreliable at detecting these fractures, as over 30% of fractures may not be observed.1,6, 7 and 8 In a series reported by Otto et al, 17 of 53 (32.1%) patients presenting with pain initially had negative radiographs but subsequently were found to have displaced fractures. Similar observations were reported by Neyton et al, as 5 of the 13 (38.5%) patients had negative radiographs.9 Furthermore, Levy et al showed the interobserver reliability for the diagnosis of these fractures on radiographs was poor for both acute and delayed presentations.1
Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Full access? Get Clinical Tree









