Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2015 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3

Percutaneous double-button fixation method for treatment of acute type III acromioclavicular joint dislocation

Pages
241–248
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)

Conclusion: The percutaneous double-button fixation technique is a safe, practical, and effective fixation method that can be used as an alternative to arthroscopic and open methods for acute Type III AC joint dislocations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional and radiological results of patients treated with the percutaneous double-button technique for acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: A retrospective evaluation was performed of 13 patients surgically treated for acute Type III AC joint dislocation with the percutaneous double-button fixation method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: The percutaneous double-button fixation technique is a safe, practical, and effective fixation method that can be used as an alternative to arthroscopic and open methods for acute Type III AC joint dislocations.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional and radiological results of patients treated with the percutaneous double-button technique for acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation. Methods: A retrospective evaluation was performed of 13 patients surgically treated for acute Type III AC joint dislocation with the percutaneous double-button fixation method. The coracoclavicular (CC) distance of the affected side was compared with that of the healthy side on anterior-posterior radiographs obtained at the final follow-up. In the functional evaluation, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Constant, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were used. Results: The 13 patients in the study included 12 males and 1 female with a mean age of 43.4 years (range: 22–60 years). The mean follow-up period was 13.61 months (range: 9–24 months). The mean CC distance on the operated side was 9.23 mm (range: 8–15 mm), and when compared with the healthy side, no statistically significant difference was observed. Preoperative Constant scores of a mean of 30.3 (range: 18–42) increased to 84.4 (range: 70–90) at the final follow-up. Preoperative DASH scores had a mean of 14.1 (range: 11–28) and decreased to 0.4 (range: 0–3) at the final followup (p<0.001). Mean preoperative VAS score was 6.0 (range: 5–8), which decreased to 0.6 (range: 0–3) at the final follow-up (p<0.001). Conclusion: The percutaneous double-button fixation technique is a safe, practical, and effective fixation method that can be used as an alternative to arthroscopic and open methods for acute Type III AC joint dislocations.

🔖

Cite This Article

ACAR, M. A., GÜLEÇ, A., ERKOÇAK, Ö. F., YILMAZ, G., DURGUT, F., ELMADAĞ, M. (2015). Percutaneous double-button fixation method for treatment of acute type III acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3, 241–248. https://ajindex.com/articles/215436

References (15)

  1. Mazzocca AD, Arciero RA, Bicos J. Evaluation and treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries. Am J Sports Med 2007;35:316–29
  2. Pauly S, Kraus N, Greiner S, Scheibel M. Prevalence and pattern of glenohumeral injuries among acute high-grade Table 2. acromioclavicular joint instabilities. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013;22:760–6
  3. Oki S, Matsumura N, Iwamoto W, Ikegami H, Kiriyama Y, Nakamura T, et al. The function of the acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular ligaments in shoulder motion: a whole-cadaver study. Am J Sports Med 2012;40:2617–26
  4. Tischer T, Salzmann GM, El-Azab H, Vogt S, Imhoff AB. Incidence of associated injuries with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations types III through V. Am J Sports Med 2009;37:136–9
  5. Rockwood CA Jr. Injuries to the acromioclavicular joint. In: Rockwood CA Jr, Green DP, editors. Fractures in adults. Vol. 1, 2nd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1984. p. 860–910, 974–82
  6. Collins DN. Disorders of the acromioclavicular joint. In: Rockwood CA Jr, Matsen FA III, Wirth MA, Lippitt SB, Fehringer EV, Sperling JW, editors. The shoulder. Vol. 4, 4th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier 2009. p. 453–526
  7. Smith TO, Chester R, Pearse EO, Hing CB. Operative versus non-operative management following Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular separation: a meta-analysis of the current evidence base. J Orthop Traumatol 2011;12:19– 27
  8. Rawes ML, Dias JJ. Long-term results of conservative treatment for acromioclavicular dislocation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:410–2
  9. Wojtys EM, Nelson G. Conservative treatment of Grade III acromioclavicular dislocations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1991;268:112–9
  10. Schlegel TF, Burks RT, Marcus RL, Dunn HK. A prospective evaluation of untreated acute grade III acromioclavicular separations. Am J Sports Med 2001;29:699–703
  11. Glick JM, Milburn LJ, Haggerty JF, Nishimoto D. Dislocated acromioclavicular joint: follow-up study of 35 unreduced acromioclavicular dislocations. Am J Sports Med 1977;5:264–70
  12. Gstettner C, Tauber M, Hitzl W, Resch H. Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008;17:220–5
  13. Nadarajah R, Mahaluxmivala J, Amin A, Goodier DW. Clavicular hook-plate: complications of retaining the implant. Injury 2005;36:681–3
  14. Press J, Zuckerman JD, Gallagher M, Cuomo F. Treatment of grade III acromioclavicular separations. Operative versus nonoperative management. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 1997;56:77–83
  15. Bradl