摘要
目的双Endobutton袢钢板技术治疗肩锁关节脱位的效果得到了广泛肯定,但针对双Endobutton袢钢板技术的改良却从未停止。文中旨在探讨运用改良双Endobutton袢钢板锁定复位技术治疗RockwoodⅢ型肩锁关节脱位的临床疗效。方法回顾性分析2010年1月至2015年12月在西南医科大学附属中医医院骨伤科肩锁关节脱位患者60例。根据手术方式的不同,分为改良双Endobutton袢钢板技术(MCDT)组(有闭合回环结,n=30)和常规双Endobutton袢钢板技术(CCDT)组(无闭合回环结,n=30),对2组术中指标(手术时间、切口长度、术中出血量),以及术前和术后1年随访指标[Constant-Murley评分(CMS)、美国加州大学肩关节评分(UCLA)、美国肩肘外科协会评分(ASES)、牛津大学肩关节评分(OSS)以及CC-Dist值)]进行比较分析。结果 MCDT组手术时间、术中出血量优于CCDT组[(52.33±8.48)min vs(78.33±11.47)min,(79.17±9.75)m L vs(103.00±7.38)m L],差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。MCDT组、CCDT组术后1年CMS、UCLA、ASES、OSS评分及CC-Dist值均优于术前;但2组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 2种方法均可取得较好的复位效果,但MCDT较CCDT复位固定更为简单、快捷,术中出血量更少。
Objective Double-endobutton technique , as a widely accepted strategy for the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocation ( ACD ) , is undergoing constant improvement .This study was to assess the clinical effect of a modified closed-loop double-endobutton technique ( CDT) in the fixation of Rockwood type Ⅲ ACD . Methods This retrospective study included 60 cases of Rockwood type Ⅲ ACD treated between January 2010 and December 2015, 30 by modified CDT (MCDT) and the other 30 by conventional CDT (CCDT).We recorded and compared the operation time, incision length , intraoperative blood loss , pre-and post-opera-tive scores in the Constant-Murley Scale ( CMS ) , UCLA Shoulder Rating Scale ( SRS) , American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Rating Scale ( ARS) and Oxford Shoulder Score ( OSS), and the vertical distance from the supraclavian to subcoracoid plane ( CC-Dist ) be-tween the two groups of patients . Results Compared with the CCDT group, the MCDT group showed a significantly shorter operation time ([78.33±11.47] vs [52.33±8.48] min, P〈0.05) and less intraoperative blood loss ([103.00±7.38] vs [79.17±9.75] mL, P〈0.05).In comparison with the baseline, the patients of MCDT group achieved markedly improved scores at 12 months after surgery in CMS (46.60±2.09 vs 97.67±0.88, P〈0.05), SRS (14.70±1.24 vs 32.17±1.21, P〈0.05), ARS (44.23±2.40 vs 91.83±1.62, P〈0.05), OSS (45.07±3.10 vs 15.80±1.81, P〈0.05), and CC-Dist ([16.76±0.88] vs [7.57±0.73] mm, P〈0.05). Conclusion MCDT, with the advantages of easier , tighter, and fas-ter reduction and fixation , is obviously superior to CCDT in the treatment of Rockwood type Ⅲ ACD .
出处
《医学研究生学报》
CAS
北大核心
2017年第10期1079-1083,共5页
Journal of Medical Postgraduates
基金
国家自然科学基金(81674095)
四川省教育厅科研项目(17ZB0472)
泸州市科技局科技计划项目(2016-176-13)