Comparison of reconstruction of acromioclavicular ligament versus internal fixation of acromioclavicular joint with clavicle hook plate in treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation by reconstruction of coracoclavicular ligament with suture anchor
10.3760/cma.j.cn115530-20200917-00607
- VernacularTitle:肩锁韧带重建与锁骨钩板肩锁关节内固定在带线锚钉重建喙锁韧带治疗肩锁关节脱位中的疗效比较
- Author:
Feilong BAO
1
;
Guangwei JI
;
Shijie KANG
;
Tao JIANG
;
Dongsheng HUANG
;
Fuxin LYU
;
Tao LIU
Author Information
1. 山东大学齐鲁医院（青岛）创伤骨科 266035
- Keywords:
Shoulder dislocation;
Reconstructive surgical procedures;
Ligaments;
Fracture fixation, internal
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma
2021;23(8):717-722
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare reconstruction of acromioclavicular ligament versus internal fixation of acromioclavicular joint with clavicle hook plate in the treatment of Rockwood Ⅲ-Ⅴ acromioclavicular dislocation by reconstruction of coracoclavicular ligament with suture anchor.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted of the 56 patients who had been treated for Rockwood Ⅲ-Ⅴ acromioclavicular dislocation from January 2015 to June 2019 at Department of Orthopaedic Trauma, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University (Qingdao). Of them, 26 were treated by reconstruction of coracoclavicular ligament with suture anchor plus reconstruction of acromioclavicular ligament (reconstruction group) and 30 by reconstruction of coracoclavicular ligament with suture anchor plus internal fixation of acromioclavicular joint with clavicle hook plate (plate group). The 2 groups were compared in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, Constant-Murley score and Subjective Shoulder Rating System (SSRS) score at the last follow-up, and complications.Results:The 2 groups were comparable because there were no significant differences between them in the baseline data before operation ( P>0.05). The reconstruction group was followed up for 6 to 15 months (average, 7.9 months) while the plate group for 7 to 18 months (average, 11.3 months). The average operation time was (79.9±12.6) min for the reconstruction group and (69.1±8.5) min for the plate group, showing a significant difference ( P<0.05). No significant difference was found between the 2 groups in the intraoperative blood loss [(68.5±19.1) mL versus (65.0±16.6) mL] ( P>0.05). The differences were statistically significant between the 2 groups in Constant-Murley score (87.9±3.4 for the reconstruction group versus 91.9±3.5 for the plate group) and in SSRS score (85.1±4.1 for the reconstruction group versus 88.6±3.0 for the plate group) ( P<0.05). All the wounds healed well in the reconstruction group except for one patient who reported numbness around the wound which disappeared spontaneously 3 months postoperation. In the plate group, incision infection occurred in 2 cases, the redness and swelling in one which responded to dressing change 3 weeks later and numbness around the incision in one which was recovered 5 months after operation. Conclusions:Both surgical procedures can achieve good to excellent clinical outcomes. Although reconstruction of both acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular ligaments takes more operation time, it may lead to better Constant-Murley and SSRS scores and fewer complications, and spare secondary operation.
