切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华肩肘外科电子杂志 ›› 2022, Vol. 10 ›› Issue (01) : 49 -54. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2022.01.009

论著

锁骨钩钢板内固定术后钢板钩与肩峰匹配性影像学研究
贾建波1, 易诚青1,(), 何家文1, 敖荣广1, 张旭1   
  1. 1. 201399 上海市浦东医院骨科
  • 收稿日期:2021-06-06 出版日期:2022-02-05
  • 通信作者: 易诚青
  • 基金资助:
    上海市医学重点专科(ZK2019C01); 上海市浦东新区卫生系统重点专科群建设项目资助(PWZxq2017-11)

Imaging study on the matching between plate hook and acromion after clavicular hook plate internal fixation

Jianbo Jia1, Chengqing Yi1,(), Jiawen He1, Rongguang Ao1, Xu Zhang1   

  1. 1. Department of Orthopedics, Shanghai Pudong Hospital, Shanghai 201399, China
  • Received:2021-06-06 Published:2022-02-05
  • Corresponding author: Chengqing Yi
引用本文:

贾建波, 易诚青, 何家文, 敖荣广, 张旭. 锁骨钩钢板内固定术后钢板钩与肩峰匹配性影像学研究[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(01): 49-54.

Jianbo Jia, Chengqing Yi, Jiawen He, Rongguang Ao, Xu Zhang. Imaging study on the matching between plate hook and acromion after clavicular hook plate internal fixation[J]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2022, 10(01): 49-54.

目的

通过测量锁骨钩钢板内固定术后患者影像学资料,分析发生肩峰骨侵蚀的原因是否与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度相关。

方法

回顾性分析2015年8月1日至2018年8月31日期间在上海市浦东医院骨科就诊的210例患者的影像学资料,210例患者均因肩锁关节脱位或锁骨远端骨折行锁骨钩钢板内固定治疗,其中男110例、女100例;年龄24~76岁,平均(44.60±8.75)岁;肩锁关节脱位70例,锁骨远端骨折140例。测量术后及终末随访患者肩锁关节正位X线片相关数据,按锁骨钩钢板术后是否发生肩峰骨侵蚀,将纳入患者分为3组:无骨侵蚀组(A组)、伴钢板钩移位骨侵蚀组(B组)、不伴移位的骨侵蚀组(C组),分别测量钢板钩-肩峰的匹配度(β),统计分析术后发生肩峰骨侵蚀与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度之间的关系。

结果

纳入研究的210例患者术后随访24~64周,平均(32.0±6.5)周。A组患者115例,B组患者54例,C组患者41例。A组匹配度β(3.72±0.48)mm与B组β1(6.91±0.84)mm比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);A组匹配度β(3.72±0.48)mm与C组β2(5.88±0.65)mm比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);B组匹配度β1(6.91±0.84)mm与C组β2(5.88±0.65)mm比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

锁骨钩钢板内固定术后是否发生肩峰骨侵蚀与钢板钩-肩峰匹配度β存在明显相关性,钢板钩与肩峰之间的匹配度越好,β值越小,发生肩峰骨侵蚀的可能性更小。

Background

Clavicular hook plate has been widely used to treat acromioclavicular joint dislocation and clavicular acromion fracture since the 1970s. It has become one of the most critical methods for the treatment of this type of injury. The plate's specially designed "hook" was inserted under the acromion to reduce and fix the acromioclavicular joint dislocation and clavicular acromion fracture using the lever principle. The clavicular hook plate has sufficient fixation strength to allow early active shoulder abduction after surgery. However, the clavicular hook may slide in various degrees with the movement of the shoulder joint due to three-dimensional irregular space under the acromion. It has been confirmed by numerous literature reports that there is good clinical efficacy with few complications in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocation and clavicular acromion fracture with clavicular hook plate. The abnormal sound of the shoulder joint and acromion bone erosion after operation have not yet been paid enough attention, for the symptoms are released to a greater extent after removal of internal fixators. The acromioclavicular joint is flexible, and its unique multi-dimensional activities will cause friction and cutting between the clavicular hook and acromion. Bone erosion will occur at the stress concentration point under the acromion. Many biomechanical studies on the length, angle, and height of clavicular hook plates have been reported in recent years. The research mainly focuses on the factors of the clavicular hook plate itself. There are few reports on the related complications after internal fixation due to the morphological difference of acromion.

Objective

To investigate the causes of acromion bone erosion in patients with distal clavicle fractures or acromioclavicular joint dislocations after internal fixation with a clavicular hook plate and determine whether it is related to the matching of plate hook and acromion.

Methods

From August 1, 2015 to August 31, 2018, the clinical data of 210 patients with acromioclavicular joint dislocation or distal clavicle fracture treated with clavicular hook plate in the department of orthopedics, Shanghai Pudong Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. There were 110 males and 100 females, and the ages ranged from 24 to 76 years old (44.60 years±8.75 years) . There were 70 acromioclavicular joint dislocations and 140 cases of distal clavicular fractures. The relevant data were measured on the anteroposterior X-ray films of the acromioclavicular joint collected after the surgeries and final follow-ups. According to whether the acromion bone erosion occurred after clavicular hook plate fixation, the patients were divided into no bone erosion group, bone erosion with clavicular hook displacement group, and bone erosion without clavicular hook displacement group, and the matching degree (β) of plate hook-acromion was measured respectively. The relationship between acromion bone erosion and plate hook and acromion matching degree was statistically analyzed.

Results

All patients were followed up for 24 to 64 weeks (32.0 weeks±6.5 weeks) . Group A (no acromion bone erosion group) included 115 cases, group B (bone erosion with clavicular hook displacement) included 54 cases, and group C (bone erosion without clavicular hook displacement) included 41 cases. There was a significant difference in matching degree (β) between group A (β=3.72 mm±0.48 mm) and group B (β1=6.91 mm±0.84 mm) (P<0.05) . The matching degree of group A (β=3.72 mm±0.48 mm) was significantly different from that of group C (β2=5.88 mm±0.65 mm) (P<0.05) . There was a significant difference in matching degree between group B (β1=6.91 mm±0.84 mm) and group C (β2=5.88 mm±0.65 mm) (P<0.05) .

Conclusion

Acromion bone erosion after clavicular hook plate fixation is significantly correlated with the matching degree (β) of plate hook-acromion. The better matching the plate hook and acromion is, the less the possibility of acromion bone erosion.

表1 纳入研究患者一般资料(±s
图1 沿钢板钩的外侧缘分别做切线:A线、B线,A线和B线相交于a点。沿肩峰下缘作切线:C线,从a点作C线的垂线并相交于b点,线段ab的长度定义为钢板钩-肩峰的匹配度β
图2 杨某,男,56岁,右肩锁关节脱位(RockWood分型:TypeⅤ),锁骨钩钢板内固定术后7个月随访:伴钢板钩移位的骨侵蚀,钢板钩-肩峰匹配度β:6.42 mm 图A:术后3 d;图B:术后7个月
图3 杨某,男,56岁,左锁骨肩峰端骨折(Neer分型:TypeⅡ),锁骨钩钢板内固定术后8个月出现不伴钢板钩移位的骨侵蚀,钢板钩-肩峰匹配度β:6.83 mm 图A:术后3 d;图B:术后8个月
表2 三组患者术后钢板钩-肩峰的匹配度比较(n=210,±s
图4 唐某,男,56岁 图A:左锁骨肩峰端骨折(Neer分型:TypeⅡ);图B:术后3 d;图C:钢板钩-肩峰的匹配度β:3.09 mm;图D:锁骨钩钢板内固定术后11个月肩峰无骨侵蚀
图5 锁骨钢板钩在肩峰下置入通道不是固定的 图A:肩峰宽度为从肩峰后外侧角(PL)到前外侧(AL)角的距离,长度为从外侧宽度中点(MP)到内侧的垂直距离。虚线表示锁骨钢板钩的位置;图B:锁骨钢板钩位于PL和AL之间,根据置入钢板的位置不同而呈一个扇形区域分布
[1]
McConnell AJ, Yoo DJ, Zdero R,et al. Methods of operative fixation of the acromio-clavicular joint: a biomechanical comparison[J]. J Orthop Trauma, 2007,21(4):248-253.
[2]
Flinkkilä T, Ristiniemi J, Lakovaara M,et al. Hook-plate fixation of unstable lateral clavicle fractures: a report on 63 patients[J]. Acta Orthop, 2006,77(4):644-649.
[3]
Haidar SG, Krishnan KM, Deshmukh SC. Hook plate fixation for type II fractures of the lateral end of the clavicle[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2006,15(4):419-423.
[4]
Muramatsu K, Shigetomi M, Matsunaga T,et al. Use of the AO hook-plate for treatment of unstable fractures of the distal clavicle[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2007,127(3):191-194.
[5]
Charity RM, Haidar SG, Ghosh S, et al. Fixation failure of the clavicular hook plate: a report of three cases[J]. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2006 ,14(3):333-335.
[6]
Lee KW, Lee SK, Kim KJ, et al. Arthroscopic-assisted locking compression plate clavicular hook fixation for unstable fractures of the lateral end of the clavicle: a prospective study[J]. Int Orthop, 2010,34(6):839-845.
[7]
Gstettner C, Tauber M, Hitzl W,et al. Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2008,17(2):220-225.
[8]
Faraj AA, Ketzer B. The use of a hook-plate in the management of acromioclavicular injuries. Report of ten cases[J]. Acta Orthop Belg, 2001 ,67(5):448-451.
[9]
Elmaraghy AW, Devereaux MW, Ravichandiran K, et al. Subacromial morphometric assessment of the clavicle hook plate [J]. Injury, 2010,41(6):613-619.
[10]
Hung LK, Su KC, Lu WH, et al. Biomechanical analysis of clavicle hook plate implantation with different hook angles in the acromioclavicular joint[J]. Int Orthop, 2017,41(8):1663-1669.
[11]
Hemmann P, Koch M, Gühring M, et al. Acromioclavicular joint separation treated with clavicular hook plate: a study of radiological and functional outcomes[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2021 ,141(4):603-610.
[12]
Taleb H, Afshar A, Shariyate MJ, et al. Comparison of Short-Term Clinical Outcomes of Hook Plate and Continuous Loop Double Endobutton Fixations in Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation[J]. Arch Bone Jt Surg, 2019,7(6):545-550.
[13]
Schmidt J, Altmann T, Schmidt I, et al. The Effects of Hook Plates on the Subacromial Space. A Clinical and MRI Study[J]. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg, 2009,35(2):132-140.
[14]
Lin HY, Wong PK, Ho WP, et al. Clavicular hook plate may induce subacromial shoulder impingement and rotator cuff lesion— —dynamic sonographic evaluation[J]. J Orthop Surg Res, 2014 ,9:6.
[15]
Eschler A, Gradl G, Gierer P, et al. Hook plate fixation for acromioclavicular joint separations restores coracoclavicular distance more accurately than PDS augmentation, however presents with a high rate of acromial osteolysis[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2012 ,132(1):33-39.
[16]
Haidar SG, Singh Shergill G. Re: clavicular hook plate for lateral end fractures: a prospective study[J]. Injury, 2007,38(2):252-253.
[17]
Tambe AD, Motkur P, Qamar A,et al. Fractures of the distal third of the clavicle treated by hook plating[J]. Int Orthop, 2006,30(1):7-10.
[18]
Alraddadi A, Alashkham A, Lamb C,et al. Examining changes in acromial morphology in relation to spurs at the anterior edge of acromion[J]. Surg Radiol Anat, 2019,41(4):409-414.
[19]
Ludewig PM, Phadke V, Braman JP,et al. Motion of the shoulder complex during multiplanar humeral elevation[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2009,91(2):378-389.
[20]
Fung M, Kato S, Barrance PJ,et al. Scapular and clavicular kinematics during humeral elevation: a study with cadavers[J]. J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 2001,10(3):278-285.
[21]
Shih CM, Huang KC, Pan CC,et al. Biomechanical analysis of acromioclavicular joint dislocation treated with clavicle hook plates in different lengths[J]. Int Orthop, 2015,39(11):2239-2244.
[22]
Lee CH, Shih CM, Huang KC, et al. Biomechanical Analysis of Implanted Clavicle Hook Plates With Different Implant Depths and Materials in the Acromioclavicular Joint: A Finite Element Analysis Study[J]. Artif Organs, 2016,40(11):1062-1070.
[23]
Hung LK, Su KC, Lu WH,et al. Biomechanical analysis of clavicle hook plate implantation with different hook angles in the acromioclavicular joint[J]. Int Orthop, 2017,41(8):1663-1669.
[24]
Maier D, Jaeger M, Reising K,et al. Injury patterns of the acromioclavicular ligament complex in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: a cross-sectional, fundamental study[J]. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2016,17(1):385.
[1] 李雪兰, 杨萌, 赵辰阳, 王铭, 张睿, 齐振红, 李建初, 姜玉新. 超微血流成像在类风湿关节炎滑膜血流评估中的应用[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(02): 232-237.
[2] 朱圣旺, 覃志, 韦钧译, 石泽锋, 李书振. 关节镜下双带襻钢板技术治疗肩锁关节脱位[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(01): 99-103.
[3] 池宸申, 林彬辉, 丁浩亮, 孙卫兵, 孙健. 关节镜下双束重建喙锁韧带治疗肩锁关节脱位[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2021, 14(02): 97-103.
[4] 崔壮, 魏宽海, 陈滨, 胡岩君, 余斌. Rockwood III型肩锁关节脱位治疗策略[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 279-283.
[5] 刘有才, 张义君, 赵欣磊, 周家玄. Endobutton带袢钛板与钩钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位病例的疗效比较[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(03): 212-217.
[6] 潘超, 张博, 韩磊, 刘俊阳, 崔鹏, 闫兵山, 田旭, 刘林涛, 东靖明. 肩锁关节脱位治疗的研究进展[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 186-191.
[7] 纪晓希, 陈雨舟, 黄秋, 曹烈虎, 朱文辉. 肩峰成形术对关节镜下修补外伤性与非外伤性肩袖损伤临床结果影响的比较研究[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(02): 103-110.
[8] 郁凯. 陈旧性肩锁关节脱位的治疗[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(01): 7-11.
[9] 张涛, 崔进, 周启荣, 陈晓, 苏佳灿. 肩锁关节脱位的治疗进展[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2023, 11(01): 77-82.
[10] 王雄, 杨璐, 子树明, 魏文强, 梁志民, 顾峥嵘, 曹烈虎. TightRope钢板与锁骨钩钢板治疗Rockwood III型急性肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(04): 300-306.
[11] 何国文, 高大伟, 陈亮, 胡栢均. 保守治疗与锁骨钩钢板内固定手术治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的中长期疗效对比研究[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(02): 110-114.
[12] 何国文, 高大伟, 陈亮, 胡栢均, 吴宇峰. Endobutton带袢钢板内固定与锁骨钩钢板内固定治疗RockwoodⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的中长期疗效观察[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(02): 105-109.
[13] 张亚军, 党育, 杨剑, 张刘会, 谭利, 杨忠, 郁凯. 关节镜下喙锁和肩锁韧带重建治疗陈旧性Rockwood III型肩锁关节脱位[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(01): 28-33.
[14] 刘中帆, 曾浩, 裴泳榕, 王靖, 翁晓军. 关节镜下细骨道双Endobutton钢板联合Fiberwire缝线治疗Rockwood III ~ V型肩锁关节脱位[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2021, 09(02): 142-147.
[15] 钟浩博, 刘伟乐, 刘正蕊, 郑少伟, 黄守镔, 孙江森, 孙春汉, 李胜发. 三重带袢钢板技术治疗新鲜Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位手术创伤与临床疗效相关性研究[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2020, 08(04): 327-334.
阅读次数
全文


摘要