| Literature DB >> 36092175 |
Bernardo Barcellos Terra1, Tannous Jorge Sassine1, João Victor Rezende Soares Pinheiro1, Matheus Alberto Nunes Lopes2, Dhyego Bonelle DE Sousa2, Vinicius Souza Amorim2.
Abstract
Introduction: Scapular fractures are rare injuries and are often associated with high-energy trauma, with joint fractures accounting for only 15% of all scapular fractures. Surgical treatment is indicated for fractures with large deviations and with joint instability. Objective: This study evaluates the clinical and functional results after surgical treatment of scapular fractures.Entities:
Keywords: Glenoid Cavity; Scapula; Shoulder Joint
Year: 2022 PMID: 36092175 PMCID: PMC9425968 DOI: 10.1590/1413-785220223004e247095
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Acta Ortop Bras ISSN: 1413-7852 Impact factor: 0.683
Figure 1A: Anteroposterior (AP) radiograph of a 33-year-old patient with AO type 14F1.2 fracture; B: Computed tomography scan with 3D reconstruction; C and D: Postoperative AP and axillary radiographs, respectively, of a patient subjected to fixation of small fragments with two dynamic compression plates (DCP).
Figure 2A: Anteroposterior radiograph of the shoulder of a 28-year-old patient with AO type 14F1.2 fracture; B: Perfil radiograph shoulder showing a translation greater than 100%; C: Computed tomography scan with 3D reconstruction; D and E: Postoperative AP and profile radiographs highlighting the fixation of small fragments with plates on the lateral and medial borders of the scapula.
Figure 3A: Anteroposterior radiograph of the shoulder of a 55-year-old patient with AO type 14F1.3 fracture. B and C: Computed tomography scan with 3D reconstruction highlighting the affected medial border of the scapula; D, E, and F: Postoperative AP and perfil radiographs of the shoulder, highlighting the fixation of the lateral and medial borders of the scapula, with fixation of the clavicle.
Figure 4Photograph of the scapular region showing the Judet (A) and mini-open lateral (B) approaches.
Figure 5Classifications used: AO and Ideberg-Goss.
Data from eight patients, with a mean age of 39 years old, mean UCLA score of 29, and mean VAS of 2.4.
| Range of motion | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Case | Age | Follow-up period (months) | AO Classification | Ideberg Classification | UCLA | VAS | Elevation | Lateral rotation | Medial rotation |
| 1 | 33 | 40 | 14F1.2 | Ib | 32 | 0 | 160 | 80 | T6 |
| 2 | 28 | 38 | 14F1.3 / 14FB1 | II | 31 | 1 | 150 | 60 | T7 |
| 3 | 55 | 32 | 14F1.3 | II | 28 | 4 | 130 | 45 | T10 |
| 4 | 38 | 36 | 14F1.2 / 14B1 | IV | 27 | 4 | 140 | 70 | T7 |
| 5 | 31 | 28 | 14F1.2 / 14B1 | IV | 29 | 2 | 160 | 80 | T6 |
| 6 | 33 | 18 | 14F0 | II | 32 | 2 | 160 | 80 | T6 |
| 7 | 33 | 13 | 14F1.3 / 14B2 / 14A2 | III | 28 | 3 | 160 | 45 | T9 |
| 8 | 62 | 6 | 14F2 / 14A3 | Vc | 26 | 3 | 110 | 36 | T11 |
| MEAN | 39 | 26 | 29 | 2.4 | 146 | 62 | 70 | ||