[1]白晓东 安明① 宋朝晖 张谦① 刘松 马利杰 吴昊天**.3种方式治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效分析[J].中国微创外科杂志,2020,01(12):1093-1099.
　Bai Xiaodong*,An Ming,Song Zhaohui*,et al.Efficacy Comparison of Three Different Methods for Treating Rockwood Type Ⅲ Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2020,01(12):1093-1099.
点击复制

3种方式治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效分析()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
01
期数:
2020年12期
页码:
1093-1099
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2020-12-25

文章信息/Info

Title:
Efficacy Comparison of Three Different Methods for Treating Rockwood Type Ⅲ Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation
作者:
白晓东 安明① 宋朝晖 张谦① 刘松 马利杰 吴昊天**
（河北医科大学第三医院创伤急救中心，石家庄050051）
Author(s):
Bai Xiaodong*;  An Ming;  Song Zhaohui*;  et al.
*Trauma Emergency Center, Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050051, China
关键词:
肩锁关节脱位; 钩钢板; TightRope钛板
Keywords:
Acromioclavicular joint dislocation; Hook plate; TightRope
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的比较保守治疗、切开复位钩钢板固定和改良闭合复位TightRope袢钢板固定治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2014年9月~2018年11月有完整随访料85例Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位的临床资料，根据治疗方式分为3组：保守组31例，钩板组35例，TightRope组19例。比较3组治疗前和治疗后12个月喙锁距离，治疗前和治疗后3 d、6周、6个月、12个月上肢功能（Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand，DASH）评分、ConstantMurley评分、疼痛视觉模拟评分（Visual Analogue Scale,VAS)，以及并发症发生率。结果治疗后12个月保守组、钩板组和TightRope组喙锁距离分别为（20.6±2.4）、（13.0±1.8）、（12.3±1.9）mm，3组间差异有显著性（F=142165,P=0.000），保守组喙锁距离显著大于钩板组和TightRope组（P=0.000，P=0.000），钩板组和TightRope组差异无统计学意义（P=0.269）。治疗后3 d 3组间DASH、ConstantMurley评分差异均有显著性，即TightRope组显著优于钩板组（P＜0.05），钩板组显著优于保守组（P＜0.05）。治疗后6周，TightRope组DASH、ConstantMurley评分显著优于钩板组与保守组（P＜0.05），钩板组与保守组之间差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。治疗后3 d、6周TightRope组疼痛VAS评分显著优于钩板组和保守组（P＜0.05），钩板组和保守组VAS评分差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。治疗前和治疗后6、12个月3组DASH、ConstantMurley、VAS评分差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05）。保守组、钩板组、TightRope组并发症发生率分别为6.4%（2/31）、11.4%（4/35）、5.3%（1/19），差异无统计学意义（χ2=0.825，P=0.662）。结论对于Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位，3种治疗方法均可获得满意的功能。改良微创TightRope可迅速恢复关节的稳定性，减轻疼痛，改善功能、避免残留畸形，尤其适用于对美观和早期功能要求高的患者。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical effect of conservative treatment, hook plate fixation and modified minimally invasive TightRope fixation in the treatment of Rockwood type Ⅲ acromioclavicular joint dislocation.MethodsA retrospective casecontrolled study was conducted to analyze the clinical data of 85 patients with Rockwood type Ⅲ acromioclavicular joint dislocation from September 2014 to November 2018. According to the different treatments, the patients were divided into three groups: conservative group (n=31), hook plate group (n=35) and TightRope group (n=19). The coracoclavicular distance at the time of injury and 12th months after treatment, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand(DASH) score, ConstantMurley score and VAS score before treatment, 3rd day, 6th week, 6th month and 12th month after treatment, and the incidence of complications were compared among the three groups.ResultsAt the 12th month after treatment, the average coracoclavicular distance in the conservative group (20.6±2.4)mm was significantly higher than that in the hook plate group (13.0±1.8)mm and TightRope group (12.3±1.9)mm (F=142.165,P=0.000). The coracoclavicular distance in the conservative group was significantly larger than that in the hook plate group and TightRope group (P=0.000, P=0.000), but there was no significant difference between the hook plate group and TightRope group (P=0.269). There were significant differences in DASH and ConstantMurley scores among the three groups 3 days after treatment, that is, the TightRope group was significantly better than the hook plate group (P<0.05), and the hook plate group was significantly better than the conservative group (P<0.05). The DASH and ConstantMurley scores of TightRoap group were significantly better than those of hook plate group and conservative group 6 weeks after treatment (P<0.05),but there was no significant difference between hook plate group and conservative group (P<0.05). The VAS score of TightRope group was significantly better than that of hook plate group and conservative group 3 days and 6 weeks after treatment (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in VAS score between hook plate group and conservative group (P>0.05). There was no significant difference in DASH, ConstantMurley and VAS scores among the three groups before treatment and 6 and 12 months after treatment (P>0.05). The complication rates of conservative group, hook plate group and TightRope group were 6.4% (2/31), 11.4% (4/35) and 5.3% (1/19), respectively, with no significant difference (χ2=0.825, P=0.662).ConclusionsFor Rockwood type Ⅲ acromioclavicular joint dislocation, all three treatments can obtain satisfactory function results. Modified minimally invasive TightRope operation can quickly restore joint stability, reduce pain, avoid residual deformities, and improve immediate function, especially suitable for patients with high requirements for beauty and early function.

参考文献/References:

[1]Chillemi C, Franceschini V, Dei Giudici L, et al. Epidemiology of isolated acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Emerg Med Int,2013,2013:171609.
[2]Kayaalp ME, Seker A. Acromioclavicular joint separation. N Engl J Med, 2017,376(1):e1.
[3]Li X, Ma R, Bedi A, et al. Management of acromioclavicular joint injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2014,96(1):73-84.
[4]Milewski MD, Tompkins M, Giugale JM, et al. Complications related to anatomic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments. Am J Sports Med,2012,40(7):1628-1634.
[5]Murray IR, Robinson PG, Goudie EB, et al. Open reduction and tunneled suspensory device fixation compared with nonoperative treatment for typeⅢ and typeⅣ acromioclavicular joint dislocations: The ACORN prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2018,100(22):1912-1918.
[6]Murena L, Canton G, Vulcano E, et al. Scapular dyskinesis and SICK scapula syndrome following surgical treatment of type Ⅲ acute acromioclavicular dislocations. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc,2013,21(5):1146-1150.
[7]Cox CL. Hookplate fixation in patients with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation improved radiographic but not clinical outcomes compared with nonoperative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am,2016,98(16):1405.
[8]Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma S. Multicenter randomized clinical trial of nonoperative versus operative treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. J Orthop Trauma,2015,29(11):479-487.
[9]刘瀚忠,隋文渊,翟丽芹,等.锁骨钩钢板与Endobutton带袢钢板治疗肩锁关节脱位的疗效比较.中华创伤骨科杂志,2019,21(8):710-713.
[10]吴毛,严松鹤,俞云飞,等.可调锁扣TightRope微创重建喙锁韧带治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位.中华创伤杂志,2019,35(7):631-637.
[11]Yi Y, Kim JW. Coronal plane radiographic evaluation of the single TightRope technique in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injury. J Shoulder Elbow Surg,2015,24(10):1582-1587.
[12]崔煦,王秀会,王明辉,等.TightRope治疗Rockwood Ⅲ型肩锁关节脱位.中华手外科杂志,2019,35(3):196-198.
[13]Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) ［corrected］. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med,1996,29(6):602-608.
[14]Ye T, Ouyang Y, Chen A. Evaluation of coracoclavicular stabilization of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation with multistrand titanium cables. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol,2014,24(7):1061-1066.
[15]Walz L, Salzmann GM, Fabbro T, et al. The anatomic reconstruction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations using 2 TightRope devices: a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med,2008,36(12):2398-2406.
[16]Cai L, Wang T, Lu D, et al. Comparison of the tight rope technique and clavicular hook plate for the treatment of rockwood type Ⅲ acromioclavicular joint dislocation. J Invest Surg,2018,31(3):226-233.
[17]Qi W, Xu Y, Yan Z, et al. The TightRope technique versus clavicular hook plate for treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation: A systematic review and metaanalysis. J Invest Surg,2019:1-10.
[18]Joukainen A, Krger H, Niemitukia L, et al. Results of operative and nonoperative treatment of Rockwood types Ⅲ and Ⅴ acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a prospective, randomized trial with an 18 to 20year followup. Orthop J Sports Med,2014,2(12):2325967114560130.
[19]Tamaoki MJ, Lenza M, Matsunaga FT, et al. Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2019,10:CD007429.
[20]Gumina S, Carbone S, Postacchini F. Scapular dyskinesis and SICK scapula syndrome in patients with chronic type Ⅲacromioclavicular dislocation. Arthroscopy,2009,25(1):40-45.
[21]卢瀚宇, 姬洪全, 周方.肩锁关节脱位的微创治疗.中国微创外科杂志,2016,16(10):939-941.
[22]Tossy JD, Mead NC, Sigmond HM. Acromioclavicular separations: useful and practical classification for treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res,1963,28:111-119.
[23]Salem KH, Schmelz A. Treatment of tossy Ⅲ acromioclavicular joint injuries using hook plates and ligament suture. J Orthop Trauma,2009,23(8):565-569.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
基金项目：河北省医学科学研究重点课题计划（20180430）**通讯作者，Email：haotian.zj.wu@hotmail.com ①（保定市第一中心医院骨科，保定071000）
更新日期/Last Update: 2021-03-03