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 (02) : 110 -114. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2022.02.004

论著

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
何国文1, 高大伟1,(), 陈亮1, 胡栢均1   
  1. 1. 528400 中山市中医院关节科
  • 收稿日期:2021-08-23 出版日期:2022-05-05
  • 通信作者: 高大伟
  • 基金资助:
    中山市科技局医疗卫生重大专项(2016B1006); 广东省卫健委医学科学技术研究基金项目(A2019306)

Comparative Study of long-term and mid-term effects of conservative treatment and internal fixation with clavicular hook plate for Rockwood III acromioclavicular dislocation

Guowen He1, Dawei Gao1,(), Liang Chen1, Baijun Hu1   

  1. 1. Department of Joint, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine of the Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Zhongshan 528400, China
  • Received:2021-08-23 Published:2022-05-05
  • Corresponding author: Dawei Gao
引用本文:

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.

Guowen He, Dawei Gao, Liang Chen, Baijun Hu. Comparative Study of long-term and mid-term effects of conservative treatment and internal fixation with clavicular hook plate for Rockwood III acromioclavicular dislocation[J]. Chinese Journal of Shoulder and Elbow(Electronic Edition), 2022, 10(02): 110-114.

目的

通过对比评估分析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临床疗效,为临床上该类型肩锁关节脱位的治疗方式的选择提供依据。

方法

回顾性分析自2015年9月至2016年9月在中山市中医院关节科诊治为Roockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的患者,入选72例,成功随访47例,采用锁骨钩钢板内固定治疗(钩钢板组)23例、采用保守治疗方法(保守治疗组)24例。随访观察比较两组术后(损伤后)1年、3年、5年视觉模拟评分法(visual analogu scale,VAS)、肩关节功能评分以及并发症发生率。

结果

术后1年随访锁骨钩钢板组VAS评分稍优于保守治疗组,但两组差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);而术后3年以及5年锁骨钩钢板组VAS评分均明显优于保守治疗组,且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。术后1年、3年以及5年随访锁骨钩钢板组肩关节功能评分均明显优于保守治疗组,且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);锁骨钩钢板组并发症发生率明显低于保守治疗组,且差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

采用锁骨钩钢板内固定手术治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位,治疗效果较好,是治疗肩锁关节Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位较好的方法。

Background

Acromioclavicular dislocation is a common shoulder injury in clinical joint surgery, accounting for about 2%-12% of all joint dislocations. The injury mechanism is mainly caused by violence on the acromion, resulting in the acromioclavicular ligament and coracoclavicular ligament injury through stress conduction. According to Rockwood classification widely used in the clinic, conservative treatment can be considered for type I and II acromioclavicular dislocations, and surgical treatment can be adopted for type IV, V, and VI. At the same time, there is still controversy in the clinical treatment of Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation with coracoclavicular ligament and acromioclavicular ligament rupture. At present, studies have shown that Rockwood III acromioclavicular joint dislocation by adopting conservative treatment and internal fixation can obtain an excellent short-term curative effect. In contrast, conservative treatment can get short-term curative effects. However, with time and the movement of the shoulder joint, the possibility of further the acromioclavicular joint dislocation. For internal fixation of clavicular hook plate as the most commonly used internal fixation operation, removal of hook plate is often required 6 months after surgery. Whether the acromioclavicular joint is stable compared to the conservative treatment in the long-term curative effect comparison is unclear. Meanwhile, some foreign scholars believe that there is no sufficient evidence to prove that the therapeutic effect of clavicular hook plate is superior to non-surgical treatment. Objective To evaluate the mid and long-term clinical effects of conservative treatment and clavicular hook plate fixation in the treatment of Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation and provide the basis for treatment options.

Methods

From September 2015 to September 2016, 72 patients with Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation were retrospectively analyzed, and 47 patients were followed up. There were 23 patients treated with clavicular hook plate fixation (clavicular hook plate group) and 24 cases treated with conservative therapy (conservative treatment group) . The incidence of visual analog scale, shoulder function score, and complication rate between the two groups were compared at the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years after the operation.

Results

The visual analog score of the 1-year follow-up group was slightly better than that of the conservative group, but there was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) . The VAS scores of 3-year and 5-year clavicular hook plate groups were significantly higher than those of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05) , and the shoulder function score (Constant-Murley score) was significantly higher than that of the conservative treatment group. The VAS scores of the clavicular hook plate group in the 1st, 3rd, and 5th years were considerably better than those of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05) . The complication rate of the clavicular hook plate group was significantly lower than that of the conservative treatment group (P<0.05) .

Conclusion

Internal fixation with clavicular hook plate is an effective method for treating Rockwood type III acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

图1 试验流程图
表1 两组患者一般资料
表2 两组患者VAS评分比较(分,±s
表3 两组患者Constant-Murley评分对比情况(分,±s
表4 两组患者并发症对比情况
[1]
王博炜,罗吉伟,余斌. 肩锁关节脱位的治疗进展[J/CD] . 中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2018,6(1):1-5.
[2]
Nordin JS, Mogianos F, Hauggaard A,et al. Weighted Radiographs Are Not Useful in the Classification of Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations[J] . J Shoulder Elbow Surg,2021,30(7):452-453.
[3]
李振科,温志远,李世浩,等. Endobutton带袢钢板内固定手术治疗RockwoodⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效[J] . 中国现代药物应用,2021,15(15):76-79.
[4]
王增亮,赵力. Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位分型及治疗策略[J]. 中国组织工程研究,2018,22(35):5694-5699.
[5]
刘中帆,曾浩,裴泳榕,等. 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/CD] . 中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2021,9(2):142-147.
[6]
王宇辰. 保守与AHPLT重建治疗Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的疗效对比[D] .上海:上海交通大学,2018.
[7]
李洋,张明勇. 双Endobutton与锁骨钩钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位疗效比较的Meta分析[J] . 中国组织工程研究,2021,25(3):463-470.
[8]
CoXox CL. Hookplate fixation in patients with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation improved radiographic but not clinical outcomes compared with nonoperative treatment[J] . J Bone Joint Surg Am201698(16):1405.
[9]
Mah JM. General health status after nonoperative versus operative treatment for acute,complete acromioclavicular joint dislocation:results of a multicenter randomized clinical trial[J] . J Orthop Trauma201731(9):485-490.
[10]
Bodin JHa CSerazin C,et al. Effects of individual and work —— related factors on incidence of shoulder pain in a large working population[J]. J Occup Health201254(4) : 278-288.
[11]
Grevin KDorrestijn OWinters J C,et al.Incidence,prevalence,and consultation rates of shoulder complaints in general practice[J]. Scand J Rheumatol201241(2) : 150 -155.
[12]
孙兵,车晓明. 视觉模拟评分法(VAS)[J] . 中华神经外科杂志,2012,(6):645.
[13]
田子睿,姚敏,王拥军,等. 中文版Constant-Murley肩关节评分量表的研制与应用[J] . 中医正骨,2019,31(5):20-21,25.
[14]
徐科腾,梁远,王静成. 肩锁关节脱位治疗的最新进展[J] . 南京医科大学学报(自然科学版),2020,40(10):1565-1570.
[15]
叶春晓, 郭颖彬, 吴振斌, 等. 双Endobutton钢板与锁骨钩钢板内固定治疗Rockwood Ⅲ、Ⅴ型肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较[J] . 中国骨与关节损伤杂志, 2017, 32(9): 928-931.
[16]
胡阿威, 夏成焱, 夏春明, 等. 锁骨钩钢板与双Endobutton钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较[J] . 临床骨科杂志, 2017, 20(1): 111-113.
[17]
Allemann F,Halvachizadeh S,Waldburger M ,et al. Different treatment strategies for acromioclavicular dislocation injuries: a nationwide survey on open/minimally invasive and arthroscopic concepts[J] .Eur J Med Res, 2019, 24(1): 18.
[18]
崔鹏,东靖明,田旭,等. 锁骨远端钩钢板的应用进展[J/CD] . 中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2021,9(3):284-286.
[19]
Domos P, Sim F, Dunne M, et al. Current practice in the management of Rockwood type III acromioclavicular joint dislocations-National survey[J] . J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)201725(2):2309499017717868.
[20]
Gorbaty JD,Hsu JE,Gee AO. Classifications in brief:Rockwood classification of acromioclavicular joint separations[J] . Clin Orthop Relat Res,2017,475(1):283-287.
[21]
Le Hanneur M,Thoreson A,Delgrande D,et al. Biomechanical comparison of anatomic and extra-anatomic reconstruction techniques using local grafts for chronic instability of the acromioclavicular joint[J] . Am J Sports Med,2018,46(8):1927-1935.
[22]
王宇辰,朱昱,陆叶,等. Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位保守治疗与自体腓骨长肌腱重建喙锁韧带治疗的疗效对比研究[J/CD] . 中华肩肘外科电子杂志,2018,6(2):125-131.
[1] 李佳丽, 吴杨, 张莉, 夏斌, 何洋, 陈忠, 唐军, 母得志. 新生儿消化道穿孔患儿的临床特点及治疗结局[J]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2022, 18(06): 703-711.
[2] 胡金科, 钟文. 妊娠期输尿管结石的处理与转归[J]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 377-381.
[3] 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.
[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] 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.
[6] 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.
[7] 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.
[8] 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.
[9] 张清, 向明, 李一平, 陈杭, 胡晓川, 杨金松. 肩袖损伤保守治疗失败的危险因素分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(02): 129-134.
[10] 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.
[11] 王龑懋, 陆晟迪, 沈龙祥, 丁坚. MasonⅠ型及Ⅱ型桡骨头骨折保守治疗失败病例分析[J]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2022, 10(01): 65-73.
[12] 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.
[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] 吕鹏飞, 裴征, 张清华, 刘家帮. 老年桡骨远端关节内骨折保守与掌侧锁定钢板手术治疗的疗效比较[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 487-492.
[15] 郭志荣, 马京梅. 胎盘植入性疾病的风险评估和治疗策略[J]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2023, 12(03): 151-154.
阅读次数
全文


摘要