Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2011
Acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular cerclage reconstruction for acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations.
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.
Lädermann Alexandre, Grosclaude Maxime, Lübbeke Anne, Christofilopoulos Panayiotis, Stern Richard, Rod Thierry, Hoffmeyer Pierre
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Little information is available on the results of the different stabilization techniques described for treatment of acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries. Additionally, no studies have analyzed isometric performance of the shoulder after AC stabilization. The objective of our study was to present functional outcome including isokinetic testing and radiographic evaluation of patients treated with stabilization of AC joint dislocations.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with acute type III to V AC joint disruption underwent open coracoclavicular (CC) and AC stabilization with nonabsorbable sutures.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 4.5 ± 2.5 years (range, 2-10.5). The mean Constant score (CS) was 96. There were 34 (91.9%) excellent results, 1 good (2.7%), 1 satisfactory (2.7%), and 1 fair (2.7%). The disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) questionnaire revealed good overall subjective evaluation with a mean of 7 points. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score was 0.8. Patients with a CC distance <5 mm, or an anterosuperior AC reduction less than 50%, showed significantly better results in CS and DASH score in comparison to patients with a subluxated AC joint (P < .005). Twenty-two patients agreed to undergo isokinetic evaluation. We were unable to demonstrate any clinically significant difference between the involved and the uninvolved side.
DISCUSSION: The described technique of cerclage augmentation offers an attractive alternative in AC joint stabilization, with good to excellent results. In comparison to other techniques, there were no complications related to any implants, no graft donor site morbidity, or need for implant removal.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with acute type III to V AC joint disruption underwent open coracoclavicular (CC) and AC stabilization with nonabsorbable sutures.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 4.5 ± 2.5 years (range, 2-10.5). The mean Constant score (CS) was 96. There were 34 (91.9%) excellent results, 1 good (2.7%), 1 satisfactory (2.7%), and 1 fair (2.7%). The disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) questionnaire revealed good overall subjective evaluation with a mean of 7 points. The mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score was 0.8. Patients with a CC distance <5 mm, or an anterosuperior AC reduction less than 50%, showed significantly better results in CS and DASH score in comparison to patients with a subluxated AC joint (P < .005). Twenty-two patients agreed to undergo isokinetic evaluation. We were unable to demonstrate any clinically significant difference between the involved and the uninvolved side.
DISCUSSION: The described technique of cerclage augmentation offers an attractive alternative in AC joint stabilization, with good to excellent results. In comparison to other techniques, there were no complications related to any implants, no graft donor site morbidity, or need for implant removal.