Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2017 / Cilt: 51 - Sayı: 6

Bosworth and modiŞed Phemister techniques revisited. A comparison of intraarticular vs extraarticular acute Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocations Şxation methods in the treatment of acute Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocations*

Pages
455–458
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In Group 2, one patient had a recurrent dislocation, three patients had AC arthrosisand two patients had ossiŞcation in the CC ligament (Fig. 2).There was no superŞcial or deep wound infection in Group 1, while two patients from Group 2 had asuperŞcial wound infection.Conclusions: Our results suggest that both techniques are reliable and provide adequate reduction andsimilar outcomes in terms of functionality and pain levels, following the reduction of Type 3 AC jointdislocations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiological results ofAcromioclavicular (AC)Şxation with K-wires (the modiŞed Phemister procedure) and Coracoclavicular(CC)Şxation with the Bosworth screw in the surgical treatment of Type 3 AC joint dislocations.Methods: Thirty-two patients with complete set of medical records and who received surgical treatmentbetween September 2005 and January 2009 due to acute Rockwood Type 3 AC joint dislocation andproperly attended their follow-ups were retrospectively evaluated.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Sixteen patients (13 males, 3 females;mean age: 38, range: 24e52 years) were treated with CC Şxation with Bosworth screw (Group 1), and theother 16 (12 males, 4 females; mean age: 53.3, range: 38e64 years) with AC Şxation using K-wires(Group 2).Results: The mean follow-up time was 96 months for Group 1 and 93 months for Group 2 patients(p> 0.05).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In Group 2, one patient had a recurrent dislocation, three patients had AC arthrosisand two patients had ossiŞcation in the CC ligament (Fig. 2).There was no superŞcial or deep wound infection in Group 1, while two patients from Group 2 had asuperŞcial wound infection.Conclusions: Our results suggest that both techniques are reliable and provide adequate reduction andsimilar outcomes in terms of functionality and pain levels, following the reduction of Type 3 AC jointdislocations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term clinical and radiological results ofAcromioclavicular (AC)Şxation with K-wires (the modiŞed Phemister procedure) and Coracoclavicular(CC)Şxation with the Bosworth screw in the surgical treatment of Type 3 AC joint dislocations.Methods: Thirty-two patients with complete set of medical records and who received surgical treatmentbetween September 2005 and January 2009 due to acute Rockwood Type 3 AC joint dislocation andproperly attended their follow-ups were retrospectively evaluated. Sixteen patients (13 males, 3 females;mean age: 38, range: 24e52 years) were treated with CC Şxation with Bosworth screw (Group 1), and theother 16 (12 males, 4 females; mean age: 53.3, range: 38e64 years) with AC Şxation using K-wires(Group 2).Results: The mean follow-up time was 96 months for Group 1 and 93 months for Group 2 patients(p> 0.05). The mean ConstanteMurley score at the Şnal follow-up was 84.7 in Group 1 and 87.3 in Group2 (p¼ 0.069). Radiological evaluation of the patients revealed AC arthrosis in 2 and 3 patients in Group 1and 2, respectively. In Group 2, one patient had a recurrent dislocation, three patients had AC arthrosisand two patients had ossiŞcation in the CC ligament (Fig. 2).There was no superŞcial or deep wound infection in Group 1, while two patients from Group 2 had asuperŞcial wound infection.Conclusions: Our results suggest that both techniques are reliable and provide adequate reduction andsimilar outcomes in terms of functionality and pain levels, following the reduction of Type 3 AC jointdislocations. With lower rates of wound site infection in the early and AC arthrosis in the late postoperative period, CCŞxation method with the Bosworth screw may be a better surgical option than ACŞxation method with K-wires.Level of Evidence: Level III, Therapeutic study.

🔖

Cite This Article

YALÇINKAYA, M., BENG, K., MUTLU, H., ÜZÜMCÜGİL, O., ÇETİNKAYA, E., ARIKAN, Y. (2017). Bosworth and modiŞed Phemister techniques revisited. A comparison of intraarticular vs extraarticular acute Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocations Şxation methods in the treatment of acute Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocations*. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 51 - Sayı: 6, 455–458. https://ajindex.com/articles/190684

References (14)

  1. Esenyel CZ, Ozturk K. Bulbul M. Ayanoglu S, Ceylan HH. Coracoclavicular liga-- ment repair and screw fixation in acromioclavicular dislocations. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2010
  2. Li X. Ma R. Bedi A. Dines DM. Altchek DW. Dines JS. Management of acro-- mioclavicular joint injuries.] Bane ]t Surg. 2014
  3. Rockwood jr CA. Injuries to the acromioclavicular joint. ln: Rockwood Jr CA. Green DP. eds. Fractures in adults. 2nd ed. vol. 1. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott
  4. 1984z974--982. Balke M. Schneider MM, Shafizadeh S. Bathis H. Bouillon B. Banerjee M. Current state of treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries in Germany: is there difference between specialists and non--specialists? survey of German trauma and orthopaedic departments. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013
  5. Beitzel K. Cote MP. Apostolakos J, et al. Current concepts in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy. 2013
  6. Collins DN. Disorders of the acromioclavicular joint. ln: Rockwood Jr CA. Matsen Ill FA, Wirth MA, Lippitt SB. Fehringer EV, Sperling JW. eds. The shoulder. 4th ed. vol. 4. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier
  7. Gstettner C. Tauber M. Hitzl W. Resch H. Rockwood type Ill acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment. Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008
  8. Smith TO. Chester R. Pearse EO. Hing CB. Operative versus non--operative management following Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular separation: meta--analysis of the current evidence base. Orthop Traumatol. 2011
  9. Salzmann GM. Walz L, Schoettle PB, lmhoff AB. Arthroscopic anatomical reconstruction of the acromioclavicular joint. Acta Orthop Belg. 2008
  10. Fraser-Moodie JA, Shortt NL. Robinson CM. Injuries to the acromioclavicular joint.] Bane ]t Surg Br Vol. 2008
  11. Calvo E. Lopez--Franco M. Arribas IM. Clinical and radiologic outcomes of sur-- gical and conservative treatment of type Ill acromioclavicular joint injury. shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006
  12. Schlegel TF, Burks RT. Marcus RL, Dunn HK. prospective evaluation of untreated acute grade lll acromioclavicular separations. Am] Sports Med. 2001:29: 699--703. Spencer Jr E. E. Treatment of grade Ill acromioclavicular joint injuries: sys-- tematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007
  13. Tauber M. Management of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: current concepts. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2013
  14. Takase K, Yamamo