Literature DB >> 27734220

Acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint injuries: quality of life comparison between patients managed operatively with a hook plate versus patients managed non-operatively.

Luis Gerardo Natera Cisneros1,2, Juan Sarasquete Reiriz3,4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Surgical indication for acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries still represents a reason for shoulder and trauma debate. In high-grade injuries, surgery is advocated because some of the non-operatively managed patients may have persistent shoulder pain that could make them unable to return to their previous activity. It has been shown that many of the patients with high-grade ACJ injuries that are managed non-operatively involve the development of scapular dyskinesis, situation that may result in loss of strength and weakness. On the other side, it has been widely reported that the period while the hook plate is present involves functional limitations and pain. The purpose of this study was to compare the quality of life (QoL) of patients with acute high-grade ACJ injuries (Rockwood grade III-V), managed operatively with a hook plate versus the QoL of patients managed non-operatively, 24 months or more after shoulder injury. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with acute high-grade ACJ injuries managed operatively (hook plate) or non-operatively, between 2008 and 2012 were included. The QoL was evaluated by means of the Health Survey questionnaire (SF36), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, the Constant score and the Global Satisfaction (scale from 0 to 10) assessed at the last follow-up visit. The presence of scapular dyskinesis was assessed. Comparison between groups was made.
RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included: 11 hook plate-group (PLATE group) (5 Rockwood III and 6 V) and 21 conservative-group (CONS group) (4 Rockwood III and 17 V). The mean age was 41 [19-55] years old for the PLATE group and 38 [19-55] for the CONS group (p = 0.513). The mean follow-up was 32.50 ± 11.64 months for the PLATE group and 34.77 ± 21.98 months for the CONS group (p = 0.762). The mean results of the questionnaires assessed at the last follow-up visit were: (1) physical SF36 score (PLATE group 53.70 ± 4.33 and CONS group 52.10 ± 6.11, p = 0.449); (2) mental SF36 score (PLATE group 53.06 ± 6.10 and CONS group 56.99 ± 6.47, p = 0.110); (3) VAS for pain (PLATE group 1.45 ± 1.51 and CONS group 1.50 ± 1.79, p = 0.943); (4) DASH score (PLATE group 4.79 ± 5.60 and CONS group 5.83 ± 6.76, p = 0.668); (5) Constant score (PLATE group 91.36 ± 6.84 and CONS group 91.05 ± 7.35, p = 0.908); (6) Global Satisfaction (PLATE group 8.00 ± 1.18 and CONS group 8.45 ± 1.73, p = 0.449). There was evidence of scapular dyskinesis in 18 % (2/11) of the patients of the PLATE group and in 52.4 % (11/21) of the patients of the CONS group (p = 0.127).
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with acute high-grade ACJ injuries managed operatively with a hook plate may have the same QoL and self-reported questionnaires than patients with high-grade ACJ injuries managed non-operatively, 24 months or more after shoulder injury. If surgery is advocated for this type of injury, the orthopedic population must be aware that the hook-plate system might not represent the most suitable option. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV therapeutic; retrospective comparative study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  High-grade acromioclavicular joint injuries; Hook plate; Non-operative management; Quality of life; Scapular dyskinesis

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27734220     DOI: 10.1007/s00590-016-1862-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol        ISSN: 1633-8065


  36 in total

1.  Acromion osteolysis and fracture after hook plate fixation for acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a case report.

Authors:  Chia-Ling Chiang; Shan-Wei Yang; Meng-Yuan Tsai; Clement Kuen-Huang Chen
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 3.019

2.  Clinical and radiologic outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of type III acromioclavicular joint injury.

Authors:  Emilio Calvo; Mariano López-Franco; Ignacio M Arribas
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2006 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 3.  Transacromial erosion of a locked subacromial hook plate: case report and review of literature.

Authors:  C Edward Hoffler; Spero G Karas
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-02-26       Impact factor: 3.019

4.  Rare complication of clavicular hook plate: clavicle fracture at the medial end of the plate.

Authors:  Muliang Ding; Jiangdong Ni; Jianzhong Hu; Deye Song
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2011-08-10       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Nonoperative Versus Operative Treatment of Acute Acromio-Clavicular Joint Dislocation.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  Treatment of acute acromioclavicular dislocation. Three different methods of treatment prospectively studied.

Authors:  E Larsen; A Hede
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 0.500

7.  Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint. An end-result study.

Authors:  T N Taft; F C Wilson; J W Oglesby
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Acromioclavicular-joint injury. An end-result study.

Authors:  B Jacobs; P A Wade
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1966-04       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  [The effects of hook plates on the subacromial space--a clinical and MRT study].

Authors:  J Hackenberger; J Schmidt; T Altmann
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  2004 Sep-Oct

10.  Repair of complete acromioclavicular separations using the acromioclavicular-hook plate.

Authors:  E Sim; N Schwarz; K Höcker; A Berzlanovich
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 4.176

View more
  7 in total

Review 1.  [Current aspects and new techniques in dislocation of the shoulder joint].

Authors:  J Abel; M A Zumstein; L Bolliger; M O Schär
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Short-term outcomes of arthroscopic TightRope® fixation are better than hook plate fixation in acute unstable acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  Hamid Rahmatullah Bin Abd Razak; Eng-Meng Nicholas Yeo; William Yeo; Tijauw-Tjoen Denny Lie
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-12-09

Review 3.  Acromioclavicular joint injuries revisited: Pathoanatomy, pathomechanics, and clinical presentation.

Authors:  W Ben Kibler; Aaron Sciascia
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2022-09-01

4.  Fifteen-degree clavicular hook plate achieves better clinical outcomes in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Guanghui Li; Tuoen Liu; Xianfang Shao; Zhijun Liu; Jianhui Duan; Raji Akileh; Shousong Cao; Dadi Jin
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2018-08-09       Impact factor: 1.671

5.  Evolving Treatment Patterns of NFL Players by Orthopaedic Team Physicians Over the Past Decade, 2008-2016.

Authors:  John B Schrock; Trevor J Carver; Matthew J Kraeutler; Eric C McCarty
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 3.843

6.  A modified single-endobutton technique combined with nice knot for treatment of Rockwood type III or V acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Fangning Hu; Shumei Han; Fanxiao Liu; Zhuang Wang; Honglei Jia; Fu Wang; Lingfei Hu; Jing Chen; Bomin Wang; Yongliang Yang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-01-03       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Nonoperative Management of Traumatic Acromioclavicular Joint Injury: A Clinical Commentary with Clinical Practice Considerations.

Authors:  Aaron Sciascia; Aaron J Bois; W Ben Kibler
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2022-04-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.