{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017921146953405017, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.647619047619048, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Conservative or operative treatment of humeral head fractures in the elderly?].

The humeral head fracture in the elderly represents an unresolved problem, which is reflected by the variety of existing therapeutic strategies ranging from conservative treatment to humeral head replacement. The main factors influencing the prognostic outcome are the fracture type, age of the patient and biologic criteria such as osteoporosis, blood supply at the fragments, and the degree of soft tissue trauma. For selection of the optimal treatment, the general condition of the patient, additional injuries and chronic diseases have to be respected as much as the patient's compliance and personal demands. According to experimental and clinical findings, for displaced two- and three-part fractures of the elderly patient minimal osteosynthesis and in the future plate osteosynthesis with angular stability should be preferred. For these fracture types, conservative treatment must be included in the therapeutic spectrum. In contrast, displaced four-part fractures and fracture dislocations are indications for primary humeral head replacement. This is explained by the fact that neither conservative treatment nor surgical reconstruction procedures meet the main goal of primary therapy, aiming for early painless mobilization and for timely discharging the elderly patients in their social environment.