Dergiler / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2022 / Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 4

A new classification for combined greater tuberosity fracture and anterior shoulder dislocation: A study of fracture configurations and displacement after reduction

Sayfa
245–251
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Type III seems to be linked to higher risk of fracture displacement and may require additional surgery.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: The aim of this study was to propose a new classification of combined greater tuberosity (GT) fractures and anterior shoulder dislocation and studied the degree of displacement, functional outcomes, and need for additional surgery after reduction.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Three morphologies were proposed; type 1 (a small avulsion), type 2 (GT fractures without articular head involve- ment), and type 3 (GT associated with articular head fractures).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Type III seems to be linked to higher risk of fracture displacement and may require additional surgery.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to propose a new classification of combined greater tuberosity (GT) fractures and anterior shoulder dislocation and studied the degree of displacement, functional outcomes, and need for additional surgery after reduction. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted. We evaluated radiographs of patients treated for combined GT fractures and anterior shoulder dislocation. Three morphologies were proposed; type 1 (a small avulsion), type 2 (GT fractures without articular head involve- ment), and type 3 (GT associated with articular head fractures). Two orthopedic surgeons independently measured all radiographs and classified fractures into three types. Patients were interviewed by telephone to assess functional outcomes (the simple shoulder test (SST) and EQ-5D-5L), and additional shoulder surgery was also performed. Results: There were 52 eligible patients; 32 were male (61.5%) and the mean age was 57.3 · 17.1 years. Most cases were low-energy injuries (61.5%). Of all the cases, 32.7% were type I, 59.6% type II, and 7.7% type III cases. There were differences in the degree of displacement in each group at pre, post-reduction (both horizontal and vertical planes) and at two weeks post-reduction for HD (p 0.8) were in good to excellent agreement with the kappa value (>0.9). Three out of 52 cases (5.8%) required an additional surgery after closed reduction. Patients had good functional outcomes (SST score of 8) with an excellent utility index of EQ-5D-5L (0.9). Conclusion: This new classification exhibited good-to-excellent intra-and inter-rater reliabilities, with an ability to determine injury type. Type III seems to be linked to higher risk of fracture displacement and may require additional surgery.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Ganokroj, P., Pakawech, N., Vanadurongwan, B., Harnroongroj, T., Harnroongroj, T., Keyurapan, E. (2022). A new classification for combined greater tuberosity fracture and anterior shoulder dislocation: A study of fracture configurations and displacement after reduction. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 4, 245–251. https://ajindex.com/articles/655785

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Launonen AP, Lepola V, Saranko A, Flinkkilä T, Laitinen M, Mattila VM. Epi- demiology of proximal humerus fractures. Arch Osteoporos. 2015
  2. [CrossRef] 2. Lind T, Krøner K, Jensen J. The epidemiology of fractures of the proximal humerus. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1989
  3. 108(5):285-287. [CrossRef] 3. Gruson KI, Ruchelsman DE, Tejwani NC. Isolated tuberosity fractures of the proximal humeral: current concepts. Injury. 2008
  4. 39(3):284-298. [CrossRef] 4. George MS. Fractures of the greater tuberosity of the humerus. JAAOS. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007
  5. 15(10):607-613. [CrossRef] 5. Bahrs C, Lingenfelter E, Fischer F, Walters EM, Schnabel M. Mechanism of injury and morphology of the greater tuberosity fracture. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006
  6. 15(2):140-147. [CrossRef] 6. Dimakopoulos P, Panagopoulos A, Kasimatis G, Syggelos SA, Lambiris E. Ante- rior traumatic shoulder dislocation associated with displaced greater tuberos- ity fracture: the necessity of operative treatment. J Orthop Trauma. 2007
  7. 21(2):104-112. [CrossRef] 7. Neer CSI. The classic: displaced proximal humeral fractures: Part i. Classifica- tion and evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006
  8. [CrossRef] 8. Meinberg EG, Agel J, Roberts CS, Karam MD, Kellam JF. Fracture and disloca- tion classification compendium-2018. J Orthop Trauma. 2018
  9. 32(suppl 1):S1- S170. [CrossRef] 9. Müller ME, Koch P, Nazarian S, Schatzker J. Principles of the classification of fractures. In: The Comprehensive Classification of Fractures of Long Bones. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer
  10. Mutch J, Laflamme GY, Hagemeister N, Cikes A, Rouleau DM. A new morphologi- cal classification for greater tuberosity fractures of the proximal humerus: valida- tion and clinical implications. Bone Joint J. 2014
  11. B(5):646-651. [CrossRef] 11. Hébert-Davies J, Mutch J, Rouleau D, Laflamme GY. Delayed migration of greater tuberosity fractures associated with anterior shoulder dislocation. J Orthop Trauma. 2015
  12. 29(10):e396-e400. [CrossRef] 12. Lippitt S, Harryman D, Matsen F. A practical tool for evaluating function: the simple shoulder test. In: Matsen F, Hawkins R, eds. The Shoulder: A Balance of Mobility and Stability. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
  13. Kangwanrattanakul K, Parmontree P. Psychometric properties comparison between eq-5d-5l and eq-5d-3l in the general Thai population. Qual Life Res. 2020
  14. 29(12):3407-3417. [CrossRef] 14. Pattanaphesaj J, Thavorncharoensap M, Ramos-Goñi JM,