Literature DB >> 26562583

A Comparison of Exposure Between the Classic and Modified Judet Approaches to the Scapula.

Luke S Harmer1, Kevin D Phelps, Colin V Crickard, Katherine M Sample, Erica B Andrews, Nady Hamid, Joseph R Hsu.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A debate exists over the optimal approach for addressing fractures of the scapula and glenoid. The purpose of this study is to (1) quantify and compare osseous exposure using modified Judet (MJ) and classic Judet (CJ) approaches and (2) assess the change in scapular exposure after triceps release from the inferior glenoid.
METHODS: Ten arms on 5 fresh-frozen torsos underwent MJ and CJ approaches. A triceps release was performed following the CJ approach in all specimens. Visual and/or palpable access to relevant surgical landmarks was recorded. Calibrated digital photographs were taken of each approach and analyzed using Image J (NIH, Bethesda, MD) to calculate the surface area of exposed bone.
RESULTS: The MJ and CJ approaches exposed 16.8 (±7.58) cm(2) and 98.6 (±25.39) cm(2) of bone, respectively (P < 0.001). The full medial and lateral borders of the scapula were visualized in all approaches with mobilization of the teres minor. Palpable access to the full scapular spine was possible in all cadavers. Although the MJ and CJ approaches only allowed the inferior gleniod neck to be visualized in 1 and 2 specimens, respectively, performing a triceps release provided access to this structure. It also increased the CJ exposure by 12.6 cm(2) (P < 0.001) and allowed palpation of the anterior glenoid margin in 100% of specimens.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the MJ approach allows similar access to landmarks important for reduction and fixation while exposing only 20% of the surface area typically visualized with the CJ approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26562583     DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000486

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Trauma        ISSN: 0890-5339            Impact factor:   2.512


  6 in total

1.  Does the Watson-Jones or Modified Smith-Petersen Approach Provide Superior Exposure for Femoral Neck Fracture Fixation?

Authors:  Paul M Lichstein; John P Kleimeyer; Michael Githens; John S Vorhies; Michael J Gardner; Michael Bellino; Julius Bishop
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Augmented reality and three-dimensional plate library-assisted posterior minimally invasive surgery for scapula fracture.

Authors:  Qiang Guo; Xiaoning Li; Yifu Tang; Yuzhao Huang; Ling Luo
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Ring versus non-ring plate for the treatment of displaced scapular body fractures: a retrospective study with a mean follow-up of 5 years.

Authors:  Zheng Yuan; Fan Zhang; Guanzhao Liang; Xianshang Zeng; Dan Liu; Chen Yang; Weiguang Yu; Qiang Zhang; Xinchao Zhang
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2018-05-29       Impact factor: 1.671

4.  Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Extraarticular Scapular Neck and Body Fractures With Good Short Term Functional Outcome.

Authors:  Muhammad Azrin Mohd Asihin; Mohd Yazid Bajuri; Premganesh K Ganaisan; Abdul Rauf Ahmad
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2019-12-17

5.  [Internal fixation of lateral and medial borders for displaced scapular body fractures via minimally invasive approach:results of 23 cases].

Authors:  Mingxuan Gao; Dejun Nie; Yanfeng Chang; Weiqiang Xie; Yue Wang; Xingyu Pu; Wei Zhang; Wenyuan Luo
Journal:  Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban       Date:  2019-12-25

6.  Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?

Authors:  Giuseppe Porcellini; Paolo Palladini; Stefano Congia; Alessandro Palmas; Giovanni Merolla; Antonio Capone
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2018-09-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.