Outcomes Following Different Fixation Strategies of Neer Type IIB Distal Clavicle Fractures.
Acromioclavicular separation
Bosworth screw
Clavicle fracture
Hook plate
Locking plate
Neer IIB distal clavicle fracture
Suture repair
Journal
The archives of bone and joint surgery
ISSN: 2345-4644
Titre abrégé: Arch Bone Jt Surg
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101636743
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2022
Feb 2022
Historique:
received:
25
12
2020
accepted:
09
07
2021
entrez:
3
6
2022
pubmed:
4
6
2022
medline:
4
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Multiple surgical techniques for fixation of Neer type IIB distal clavicle fractures have been described without consensus on optimal treatment. The purpose of this study is to compare functional and radiographic results with surgical management of Neer type IIB distal clavicle fractures at a single institution. Sixty-three patients with acute Neer type IIB fractures treated operatively were evaluated. Patients with a minimum of two year follow up were included. Functional scores included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Likert patient satisfaction (1 to 5). Radiographs were assessed for osseous union and coracoclavicular (CC) distance. Thirty-eight patients met inclusion with a mean follow-up of 5.3 years. Patients were divided into five groups based on fixation technique: suture-only CC fixation (n=6), CC screw fixation only (n=3), open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) without CC fixation (n=8), hook plate fixation (n=4), and ORIF with suture CC reconstruction (n=17). Outcome scores for the entire cohort were 91.8 for ASES, 90.2 for SANE, and 10.8 for STT. Patients with hook plates had significantly lower SANE score (p=0.016), but no other significant differences in functional, satisfaction, or radiographic outcomes were found between groups. Sixteen patients (42.1%) required reoperation. Treatment of Neer type IIB fractures via suture- only fixation, plate-only fixation, or a combination of both demonstrated satisfactory mid to long term outcomes. While implant removal was more common in the CC screw and ORIF groups, no fixation technique proved functionally superior.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Multiple surgical techniques for fixation of Neer type IIB distal clavicle fractures have been described without consensus on optimal treatment. The purpose of this study is to compare functional and radiographic results with surgical management of Neer type IIB distal clavicle fractures at a single institution.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Sixty-three patients with acute Neer type IIB fractures treated operatively were evaluated. Patients with a minimum of two year follow up were included. Functional scores included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Likert patient satisfaction (1 to 5). Radiographs were assessed for osseous union and coracoclavicular (CC) distance.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Thirty-eight patients met inclusion with a mean follow-up of 5.3 years. Patients were divided into five groups based on fixation technique: suture-only CC fixation (n=6), CC screw fixation only (n=3), open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) without CC fixation (n=8), hook plate fixation (n=4), and ORIF with suture CC reconstruction (n=17). Outcome scores for the entire cohort were 91.8 for ASES, 90.2 for SANE, and 10.8 for STT. Patients with hook plates had significantly lower SANE score (p=0.016), but no other significant differences in functional, satisfaction, or radiographic outcomes were found between groups. Sixteen patients (42.1%) required reoperation.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Treatment of Neer type IIB fractures via suture- only fixation, plate-only fixation, or a combination of both demonstrated satisfactory mid to long term outcomes. While implant removal was more common in the CC screw and ORIF groups, no fixation technique proved functionally superior.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35655745
doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2021.54472.2718
pmc: PMC9117897
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
160-165Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors and any research foundation with which they are affiliated did not receive any financial payments or other benefits from any commercial entity related to the subject of this article. There are no relevant disclosures. All authors significantly contributed to the document and have reviewed the final manuscript.
Références
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Orthopedics. 2013 Jun;36(6):801-7
pubmed: 23746019
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011 Apr;131(4):525-33
pubmed: 20967548
Injury. 1992;23(1):44-6
pubmed: 1541499
Int Orthop. 2014 Jul;38(7):1461-8
pubmed: 24728348
J Orthop Trauma. 2014 Nov;28(11):e269-72
pubmed: 24667803
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 Sep;105(5):853-859
pubmed: 31202717
J Orthop Trauma. 2009 Sep;23(8):570-4
pubmed: 19704272
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2017 Apr;27(3):373-380
pubmed: 28229229
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2013 Mar;42(3):114-8
pubmed: 23527327
Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018 Aug;28(6):1065-1078
pubmed: 29569132
Orthopedics. 2005 Jul;28(7):693-6
pubmed: 16119284
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Oct;19(7):1049-55
pubmed: 20338788
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Jun;22(6):848-55
pubmed: 23177169
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2006 Dec;14(3):333-5
pubmed: 17200540
J Orthop Trauma. 2018 Aug;32 Suppl 1:S2-S3
pubmed: 29985889
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2007 Apr;127(3):191-4
pubmed: 17221230
J Orthop Surg Res. 2014 May 29;9:42
pubmed: 24885387
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Feb 5;102(3):254-261
pubmed: 31809393
Arthroscopy. 2013 Jun;29(6):998-1004
pubmed: 23726106
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2016 Jun;25(6):942-8
pubmed: 26711474
J Hand Surg Am. 2017 Dec;42(12):1036.e1-1036.e6
pubmed: 28927880
J Trauma. 2006 Jun;60(6):1358-61
pubmed: 16766986
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Aug 4;18(1):339
pubmed: 28778193
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Mar;21(3):423-9
pubmed: 22063756
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 May;24(5):700-4
pubmed: 25457780
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2009 Aug-Oct;43(4):324-30
pubmed: 19809229
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1968 May-Jun;58:43-50
pubmed: 5666866
Injury. 2009 Mar;40(3):236-9
pubmed: 19168176