Comparison of clinical efficacy between reconstruction of the superior acromioclavicular ligament with acellular dermal allografts and clavicular hook plate in acromioclavicular dislocations

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q3 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured Pub Date : 2024-10-13 DOI:10.1016/j.injury.2024.111951
{"title":"Comparison of clinical efficacy between reconstruction of the superior acromioclavicular ligament with acellular dermal allografts and clavicular hook plate in acromioclavicular dislocations","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.injury.2024.111951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purposes</h3><div>: We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of superior acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction (SALR) using acellular dermal allograft with that of clavicular hook plate fixation (HP) in patients with acromioclavicular (AC) dislocations. We hypothesized that the SALR could provide more stability than hook plate.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>: Twenty-two cases of acute AC joint dislocation between November 2021 to December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were divided into 2 groups based on the treatment with SALR (12 cases) or HP (10 cases). Patients were evaluated radiologically and clinically using coracoclavicular distance and ratio, pain visual analogue scale (PVAS), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) at postoperative 3 months and 1 year. We evaluated whether patient achieve MCID of PVAS at the last visit, based on the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) of PVAS.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>: The SALR group showed a lower rate of reduction loss (8.3 % vs. 40.0 %) and similar clinical outcomes compared to the hook plate group. Initial SANE score was statistically significantly lower in SALR group (SANE: SALR, 45.8 ± 20.7; HP, 68.0 ± 15.5, <em>p</em> = 0.009), but there were no significant differences in final clinical outcomes, including PVAS, ASES, and SANE scores.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>: SALR with acellular dermal allograft demonstrates comparable clinical outcomes to hook plate fixation and may offer a viable alternative, especially in complicated cases.</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54978,"journal":{"name":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury-International Journal of the Care of the Injured","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020138324006806","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purposes

: We aimed to compare the clinical efficacy of superior acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction (SALR) using acellular dermal allograft with that of clavicular hook plate fixation (HP) in patients with acromioclavicular (AC) dislocations. We hypothesized that the SALR could provide more stability than hook plate.

Methods

: Twenty-two cases of acute AC joint dislocation between November 2021 to December 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. All patients were divided into 2 groups based on the treatment with SALR (12 cases) or HP (10 cases). Patients were evaluated radiologically and clinically using coracoclavicular distance and ratio, pain visual analogue scale (PVAS), Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) at postoperative 3 months and 1 year. We evaluated whether patient achieve MCID of PVAS at the last visit, based on the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) of PVAS.

Results

: The SALR group showed a lower rate of reduction loss (8.3 % vs. 40.0 %) and similar clinical outcomes compared to the hook plate group. Initial SANE score was statistically significantly lower in SALR group (SANE: SALR, 45.8 ± 20.7; HP, 68.0 ± 15.5, p = 0.009), but there were no significant differences in final clinical outcomes, including PVAS, ASES, and SANE scores.

Conclusion

: SALR with acellular dermal allograft demonstrates comparable clinical outcomes to hook plate fixation and may offer a viable alternative, especially in complicated cases.

Study Design

: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在肩锁关节脱位患者中使用无细胞真皮异体移植物和锁骨钩板重建肩锁关节上韧带的临床疗效比较。
目的我们旨在比较在肩锁关节(AC)脱位患者中使用非细胞真皮异体移植物进行上肩锁韧带重建(SALR)与锁骨钩板固定(HP)的临床疗效。我们假设 SALR 比钩状钢板能提供更高的稳定性:回顾性分析2021年11月至2023年12月期间22例急性肩锁关节脱位患者。所有患者根据SALR(12例)或HP(10例)治疗方法分为两组。患者在术后3个月和1年分别接受了放射学和临床评估,评估方法包括锁骨间距和比例、疼痛视觉模拟量表(PVAS)、单次数字评估(SANE)和美国肩肘外科医生评估(ASES)。根据 PVAS 的最小临床重要差异(MCID),我们评估了患者在最后一次就诊时是否达到了 PVAS 的 MCID:结果:与钩板组相比,SALR 组的缩减率较低(8.3% 对 40.0%),临床结果相似。SALR组的初始SANE评分显著低于钩板组(SANE:SALR,45.8 ± 20.7;HP,68.0 ± 15.5,p = 0.009),但最终临床结果(包括PVAS、ASES和SANE评分)无显著差异:研究设计:研究设计:病例系列;证据级别:4。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
8.00%
发文量
699
审稿时长
96 days
期刊介绍: Injury was founded in 1969 and is an international journal dealing with all aspects of trauma care and accident surgery. Our primary aim is to facilitate the exchange of ideas, techniques and information among all members of the trauma team.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Fracture-related infection blood-based biomarkers: Diagnostic strategies The value of current diagnostic techniques in the diagnosis of fracture-related infections: Serum markers, histology, and cultures Antimicrobial resistance: Biofilms, small colony variants, and intracellular bacteria In vivo models of infection: Large animals – Mini review on human-scale one-stage revision in a porcine osteomyelitis model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1