Journal of orthopaedics · 2020
High grade acromioclavicular injury: Comparison of arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chernchujit Bancha, Artha Arrisna
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Injuries to the acromioclavicular (AC) joint disrupting the AC and Coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments could lead to loss of clavicular strut function. A High-grade AC joint injury remain challenging because of highly variety of treatment and limited evidence exists comparing clinical outcomes and complications after surgery.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcome after arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular Joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Clinical Cohort Study.
METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with a high grade (Rockwood Type III-V) Acromioclavicular Joint Injury, operatively treated with arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction from 2012 to 2018. The clinical assessment consists of Specific AC Score (SACS) and Nottingham Score. The radiographic evaluations were performed to evaluate the stability of reduction and the complications are assessed.
RESULTS: There were a significant different between groups with AC joint reconstruction and fixation group (20 vs. 8, p < 0.005) and (19 vs. 10, p < 0.005) in SAC score and Nottingham score, respectively. There were no significant different in CC dstance between two groups. At the last follow up 6 patient develop loss of reduction with CC percentage >50% in AC joint fixation. Complication developed in 5 patients (17%) including 2 mild osteolysis, 1 superficial infection, 1 implant failure, and 1 clavicle fracture.
CONCLUSION: Anatomic AC joint reconstruction was associated with functional and radiologic benefits and better restored the stability.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcome after arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular Joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Clinical Cohort Study.
METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with a high grade (Rockwood Type III-V) Acromioclavicular Joint Injury, operatively treated with arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction from 2012 to 2018. The clinical assessment consists of Specific AC Score (SACS) and Nottingham Score. The radiographic evaluations were performed to evaluate the stability of reduction and the complications are assessed.
RESULTS: There were a significant different between groups with AC joint reconstruction and fixation group (20 vs. 8, p < 0.005) and (19 vs. 10, p < 0.005) in SAC score and Nottingham score, respectively. There were no significant different in CC dstance between two groups. At the last follow up 6 patient develop loss of reduction with CC percentage >50% in AC joint fixation. Complication developed in 5 patients (17%) including 2 mild osteolysis, 1 superficial infection, 1 implant failure, and 1 clavicle fracture.
CONCLUSION: Anatomic AC joint reconstruction was associated with functional and radiologic benefits and better restored the stability.