Comparison of the Hook Plate versus TightRope System in the Treatment of Acute Type III Acromioclavicular Dislocation.

IF 1.2 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Abdulrahim Dündar, Deniz İpek
{"title":"Comparison of the Hook Plate versus TightRope System in the Treatment of Acute Type III Acromioclavicular Dislocation.","authors":"Abdulrahim Dündar,&nbsp;Deniz İpek","doi":"10.1155/2022/8706638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the clavicular hook plate (HP) technique and the minimally invasive coracoclavicular (CC) fixation with a TightRope (MITR) procedure in treating acute unstable distal clavicle dislocation.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>MITR (minimally invasive TightRope) group had 21 patients, and the open reduction and internal fixation (HP) group included 23 patients. Researchers compared MITR and HP (hook plate) outcomes for the treatment of acute type III AC joint dislocation in a retrospective analysis. The patients were followed up at 1 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Complications were analyzed such as redislocation, fractures, implant-related complications, or subacromial erosion. For the clinical outcomes, the visual analog scale (VAS) (0: no pain, 10: worst possible pain), Constant-Murley score (CMS) (100: no pain, 0: maximum pain), the average satisfaction score with their current shoulder function (range: 0-10), and the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder score (UCLA) (>27 good/excellent <27 fair/poor) were recorded at the last follow-up.</p><p><strong>Result: </strong>There were 21 sufferers in the MITR group, which comprises 19 males and 2 females and 23 individuals in the HP group (20 men and 3 women), with average ages of 43.9 and 39.2, respectively. Age, sex, laterality, and the interval between injury and surgery did not significantly differ between the two groups (0.357, 0.792, 0.432, and 0.55, respectively). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the VAS score and CMS score at one year postoperatively. The mean CCD at the initial trauma and last follow-up was not significantly different between the MITR and HP groups (<i>p</i>=0.365, <i>p</i>=0.412 respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For treating acute type III AC dislocations, the minimally invasive TightRope (MITR) system and the hook plate technique were great options. However, the minimally invasive TightRope system showed further benefits such as reduced reoperation for implant removal and reduced risk of subacromial distal clavicle osteolysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":7358,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Orthopedics","volume":"2022 ","pages":"8706638"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9744602/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8706638","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the clavicular hook plate (HP) technique and the minimally invasive coracoclavicular (CC) fixation with a TightRope (MITR) procedure in treating acute unstable distal clavicle dislocation.

Method: MITR (minimally invasive TightRope) group had 21 patients, and the open reduction and internal fixation (HP) group included 23 patients. Researchers compared MITR and HP (hook plate) outcomes for the treatment of acute type III AC joint dislocation in a retrospective analysis. The patients were followed up at 1 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Complications were analyzed such as redislocation, fractures, implant-related complications, or subacromial erosion. For the clinical outcomes, the visual analog scale (VAS) (0: no pain, 10: worst possible pain), Constant-Murley score (CMS) (100: no pain, 0: maximum pain), the average satisfaction score with their current shoulder function (range: 0-10), and the University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder score (UCLA) (>27 good/excellent <27 fair/poor) were recorded at the last follow-up.

Result: There were 21 sufferers in the MITR group, which comprises 19 males and 2 females and 23 individuals in the HP group (20 men and 3 women), with average ages of 43.9 and 39.2, respectively. Age, sex, laterality, and the interval between injury and surgery did not significantly differ between the two groups (0.357, 0.792, 0.432, and 0.55, respectively). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of the VAS score and CMS score at one year postoperatively. The mean CCD at the initial trauma and last follow-up was not significantly different between the MITR and HP groups (p=0.365, p=0.412 respectively).

Conclusion: For treating acute type III AC dislocations, the minimally invasive TightRope (MITR) system and the hook plate technique were great options. However, the minimally invasive TightRope system showed further benefits such as reduced reoperation for implant removal and reduced risk of subacromial distal clavicle osteolysis.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

钩钢板与钢丝系统治疗急性III型肩锁关节脱位的比较。
简介:本研究的目的是比较锁骨钩钢板(HP)技术和微创喙锁骨钢丝固定(MITR)治疗急性不稳定锁骨远端脱位的有效性。方法:MITR(微创钢丝)组21例,HP(切开复位内固定)组23例。研究人员在回顾性分析中比较了MITR和HP(钩钢板)治疗急性III型AC关节脱位的结果。分别于术后1、3、6、12个月随访。分析并发症,如再脱位、骨折、植入物相关并发症或肩峰下侵蚀。临床结果包括视觉模拟量表(VAS)(0:无痛,10:可能最严重的疼痛),Constant-Murley评分(CMS)(100:无痛,0:最大疼痛),对当前肩部功能的平均满意度评分(范围:0-10),以及加州大学洛杉矶分校肩部评分(UCLA)(>27)。MITR组有21人,其中男性19人,女性2人;HP组有23人(男性20人,女性3人),平均年龄分别为43.9岁和39.2岁。两组患者的年龄、性别、侧边、损伤与手术间隔无显著差异(分别为0.357、0.792、0.432、0.55)。两组术后1年VAS评分和CMS评分比较,差异无统计学意义。MITR组与HP组创伤初、末次随访时CCD平均值差异无统计学意义(p=0.365, p=0.412)。结论:微创TightRope (MITR)系统和钩钢板技术是治疗急性III型AC脱位的理想选择。然而,微创TightRope系统显示出进一步的好处,如减少植入物移除的再手术和降低肩峰下锁骨远端骨溶解的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: Advances in Orthopedics is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a forum for orthopaedics working on improving the quality of orthopedic health care. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies related to arthroplasty, hand surgery, limb reconstruction, pediatric orthopaedics, sports medicine, trauma, spinal deformities, and orthopaedic oncology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信