| Literature DB >> 36224636 |
Dashuang Li1,2, Rui Qiao1, Na Yang1, Kun Zhang1, Yangjun Zhu1, Zhe Song3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Distal clavicular fracture is a shoulder joint injury that is common in clinical settings and is generally surgically treated using the clavicular hook plate technique with a confirmed curative effect. However, symptoms, such as shoulder abduction limitation, shoulder discomfort, and postoperative joint pain, may occur in some patients. To overcome these problems, after a previous study we developed an acromial height-measuring device and a new type of clavicular hook plate. This study aimed to investigate whether an acromial height-measuring device combined with an improved new-type clavicular hook plate can better reduce the incidence of complications and improve postoperative function. To provide patients with better treatment effects, an acromion gauge and clavicular hook plate are used.Entities:
Keywords: Acromion osteolysis; Clavicular hook plate; Distal clavicle fracture; Subacromial impingement syndrome; The acromial height-measuring device
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36224636 PMCID: PMC9555107 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-022-03338-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.677
Fig. 1A shoulder height-measuring device developed by our team. The shape of the measuring instrument matches the hook plate currently used. The third picture is a physical object that has been used in clinical practice. During the operation, the c side is placed at the distal end of the clavicle, and the d side is placed under the acromion, and the height of the acromion is measured
Fig. 2In the past, the end hole of the hook steel plate was a 3.5 mm joint hole, but now it is changed to seven 2.7 mm universal holes. The hook angle of the hook steel plate in the past was 90°, and now a 110° steel plate is added
Fig. 3The patient's preoperative X-ray showed that the bone continuity of the right distal clavicle was interrupted; we chose to use the new-type hook plate fixation, which avoided the fracture line well and made the fixation firm
Comparison of gender, age, side, acromion osteolysis and SIS between the experimental group and the control group
| Group | Gender | Side | Age | Acromion osteolysis | SIS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | |||||||||
| Control group | 49 | 36 | 13 | 17 | 32 | 39.12 ± 10.63 | 12 | 37 | 14 | 35 |
| Experimental group | 32 | 19 | 13 | 15 | 17 | 36.78 ± 8.43 | 9 | 23 | 3 | 29 |
| Test statistics | – | |||||||||
| – | 0.184 | 0.273 | 0.298 | 0.715 | 0.038 | |||||
Comparison of the time from injury to operation and VAS score between the experimental group and the control group
| Group | Injury to surgery time | VAS | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 week after surgery | 3 months after surgery | 6 months after surgery | |||
| Control group | 49 | 4.00 (3.00, 5.00) | 4.00 (3.00, 4.00) | 2.00 (2.00, 3.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) |
| Experimental group | 32 | 4.00 (3.00, 5.00) | 3.00 (3.00, 3.00) | 2.00 (1.00, 2.00) | 1.00 (1.00, 2.00) |
| Test statistics | – | − 0.957 | − 4.231 | − 3.363 | − 1.263 |
| – | 0.338 | 0.000 | 0.001 | 0.207 | |
Fig. 4Review 3 months after surgery
Fig. 5Review 6 months after surgery
Fig. 6Review 1 year after surgery
Comparison of constant–Murley score between experimental group and control group
| Group | Constant–Murley score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 months after surgery | 6 months after surgery | 1 year after surgery | ||
| Control group | 49 | 72.22 ± 5.25 | 84.45 ± 4.00 | 88.00 (86.00, 90.00) |
| Experimental group | 32 | 76.22 ± 6.15 | 86.94 ± 4.28 | 90.00 (88.00, 92.00) |
| – | ||||
| – | 0.002 | 0.009 | 0.158 | |