| Literature DB >> 25626962 |
Tsung-Li Lin1, Yu-Fen Li2, Chin-Jung Hsu3,4, Chih-Hung Hung5, Chi-Chang Lin6, Yi-Chin Fong7,8, Horng-Chaung Hsu9,10, Chun-Hao Tsai11,12.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare glenopolar angle (GPA) and the functional outcomes of fixation of both the clavicle and the scapular neck, fixation of the clavicle alone, and conservative treatment for floating-shoulder injuries.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25626962 PMCID: PMC4314750 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-014-0141-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Figure 1Course of double fixation. Anteroposterior (A) and lateral (B) radiographs of the patient with ipsilateral fracture of the clavicle and the scapula neck before the treatment. The glenopolar angle was 3°; three-dimensional computerized tomography image showed the scapular neck fracture angulation was up to 43° (C); post-operative follow-up radiographs revealed the glenopolar angle was 36° (D, E); the post-operative photograph showed the operated shoulder (F) and a straight incision over the glenoid neck to access minimal dissection between the teres minor and the infraspinatus (arrow).
Selected characteristics of the patients
|
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Sex | |||||||
| Females | 7 | 53.85 | 3 | 23.08 | 6 | 46.15 | 0.3552 |
| Males | 6 | 46.15 | 10 | 76.92 | 7 | 53.85 | |
| Glenopolar angle (GPA) after consolidation | |||||||
| Normal (30°–45°) | 9 | 69.23 | 7 | 53.85 | 4 | 30.77 | 0.1787 |
| Abnormal (otherwise) | 4 | 30.77 | 6 | 46.15 | 9 | 69.23 | |
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD |
| |
| Age | 38.77 | 17.71 | 43.23 | 10.14 | 44.92 | 18.35 | 0.5970 |
| Injury Severity Score (ISS) | 11.38 | 7.95 | 13 | 10.17 | 23.92 | 18.09 | 0.0354 |
| Glenopolar angle (GPA) at injury | 15.08 | 8.06 | 25.92 | 9.88 | 24.92 | 11.15 | 0.0133 |
| Glenopolar angle (GPA) after consolidation | 35.54 | 7.10 | 28.23 | 8.88 | 25.23 | 10.17 | 0.0152 |
| Disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand score | 1.22 | 1.93 | 23.24 | 25.32 | 20.81 | 19.39 | 0.0078 |
| Constant-Murley shoulder outcome score | 76.57 | 5.46 | 65.52 | 11.04 | 62.35 | 11.31 | 0.0016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand score | 2.49 | 5.60 | 26.52 | 4.58 | 16.28 | 5.14 | 0.0092 |
| Constant-Murley shoulder outcome score | 75.22 | 3.15 | 64.51 | 2.58 | 64.86 | 2.90 | 0.0479 |
aAdjustment of age, gender, ISS, and GPA at injury.
SD standard deviation, SE standard error.
Figure 2The simple linear regression model of (A) the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and (B) the Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome (Constant) score with the post-operative glenopolar angle (GPA).