Comparative study of posterior axillary edge approach and arthroscopic assisted reduction in treatment of Ideberg type Ⅰ and Ⅱglenoid fracture of the scapula.
10.7507/1002-1892.202503073
- Author:
Bing LI
1
;
Yanhong YUAN
1
;
Peng XU
1
;
Yabing YUAN
1
;
Yuchen WANG
1
;
Xingzhou ZHANG
1
;
Zhangning HE
1
Author Information
1. The First Department of Orthopedics, Wujin Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine Affiliated to Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Changzhou Jiangsu, 213161, P. R. China.
- Publication Type:English Abstract
- Keywords:
Glenoid fracture of the scapula;
arthroscopic assisted reduction;
posterior axillary edge approach
- MeSH:
Humans;
Arthroscopy/methods*;
Scapula/surgery*;
Male;
Female;
Retrospective Studies;
Adult;
Fracture Fixation, Internal/instrumentation*;
Fractures, Bone/surgery*;
Middle Aged;
Treatment Outcome;
Bone Plates;
Suture Anchors;
Fracture Healing;
Range of Motion, Articular;
Young Adult;
Shoulder Joint/surgery*;
Operative Time
- From:
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
2025;39(5):556-562
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To compare the effectiveness of posterior axillary edge approach and arthroscopic assisted reduction in the treatment of Ideberg type Ⅰ and Ⅱ glenoid fracture of the scapula.
METHODS:The clinical data of 26 patients with fresh Ideberg type Ⅰ and Ⅱ scapular fractures admitted between June 2021 and September 2024 who met the selection criteria were analyzed retrospectively. The patients were divided into two groups according to different treatment methods. Ten cases in the posterior axillary edge group were fixed by open reduction plate through the posterior axillary edge approach, and 16 cases in the arthroscopy group were treated with suture anchor fixation under arthroscopy. There was no significant difference in baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), such as gender, age, surgical side, Ideberg type, cause of injury, time from injury to operation, rotator cuff injury, and superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) injury, etc. The operation time and fracture healing time were recorded and compared between the two groups, and the shoulder pain was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 1 week, 1 month, and 3 months after operation. At 3 and 6 months after operation, the range of motion of shoulder joint in anteflexion, abduction, external rotation, internal rotation, and backward extension was evaluated, the upper limb dysfunction was evaluated by the Disability Assessment Scale of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), and the shoulder joint function was evaluated by the Constant-Murley score. The differences between 6 months and 3 months after operation (changes) were statistically analyzed.
RESULTS:Patients in both groups were followed up 11-13 months, with an average of 12.5 months. The operation time and fracture healing time in the posterior axillary edge group were significantly shorter than those in the arthroscopy group ( P<0.05). There was no complication such as wound infection, vascular and nerve injury, loss of reduction, bone nonunion, or glenohumeral instability in both groups. At 1 week after operation, the VAS score in the posterior axillary edge group was significantly higher than that in the arthroscopy group ( P<0.05); there was no significant difference in the VAS score between the two groups at 1 and 3 months after operation ( P>0.05). At 6 months after operation, the changes of shoulder joint in anteflexion, internal rotation range of motion and DASH scores in the posterior axillary edge group were significantly lower than those in the arthroscopy group ( P<0.05), while the changes of abduction, external rotation, backward extension range of motion and Constant-Murley scores were not significantly different between the two groups ( P>0.05).
CONCLUSION:For Ideberg type Ⅰ and Ⅱ glenoid fracture of the scapula, the posterior axillary edge approach for internal fixation has a short operation time, fast fracture healing, and is beneficial for early functional recovery; arthroscopic assisted reduction has minimal trauma and can handle joint injuries simultaneously. Both surgical procedures are safe and effective, and individualized selection should be made based on soft tissue conditions and combined injuries.
