Cargando…

Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?

BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of scapular fractures with posterior approach is frequently associated with postoperative infraspinatus hypotrophy and weakness. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare infraspinatus strength and functional outcomes in patients treated with the classic Judet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Porcellini, Giuseppe, Palladini, Paolo, Congia, Stefano, Palmas, Alessandro, Merolla, Giovanni, Capone, Antonio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30187145
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-018-0509-8
_version_ 1783353122359345152
author Porcellini, Giuseppe
Palladini, Paolo
Congia, Stefano
Palmas, Alessandro
Merolla, Giovanni
Capone, Antonio
author_facet Porcellini, Giuseppe
Palladini, Paolo
Congia, Stefano
Palmas, Alessandro
Merolla, Giovanni
Capone, Antonio
author_sort Porcellini, Giuseppe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of scapular fractures with posterior approach is frequently associated with postoperative infraspinatus hypotrophy and weakness. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare infraspinatus strength and functional outcomes in patients treated with the classic Judet versus modified Judet approach for scapular fracture. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 20 cases with scapular neck and body fracture treated with posterior approach for lateral border plate fixation were reviewed. In 11 of 20 cases, we used the modified Judet approach (MJ group), and in 9 cases we used the classic Judet approach (CJ group). All fractures were classified according to the AO classification system. At follow-up examinations, patients had X-ray assessment with acromiohumeral distance (AHD) measurement, clinical evaluation, active range of motion (ROM) examination, Constant Shoulder Score, and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score. Infraspinatus strength assessment was measured using a dynamometer during infraspinatus strength test (IST) and infraspinatus scapular retraction test (ISRT). RESULTS: Demographic data did not significantly differ between the CJ group and MJ group, except for mean follow-up, which was 4.15 years in the CJ group and 2.33 in the MJ group (p < 0.001). All X-ray examinations showed fracture healing. AHD was significantly decreased in the CJ group (p = 0.006). We did not find significant differences in active ROM between the MJ and CJ groups in the injured arm (p < 0.05). The Constant Score was 75.83 (±14.03) in the CJ group and 82.75 (±10.72) in the MJ group (p = 0.31); DASH Score was 10.16 in the CJ group and 6.25 in the MJ group (p = 0.49). IST showed mean strength of 8.38 kg (±1.75) in the MJ group and 4.61 kg (±1.98) in the CJ group (p = 0.002), ISRT test was 8.7 (±1.64) in the MJ group and 4.95 (±2.1) in the CJ group (p = 0.002). Infraspinatus hypotrophy was detected during inspection in six patients (five in the CJ group and one in the MJ group); it was related to infraspinatus strength weakness in IST and ISRT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach for scapular fracture avoids infraspinatus hypotrophy and external-rotation strength weakness. We suggest use of the modified Judet approach for scapular fracture and to restrict the classic Judet approach to only when the surgeon believes that the fracture is not easily reducible with a narrower exposure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6125251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61252512018-09-19 Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference? Porcellini, Giuseppe Palladini, Paolo Congia, Stefano Palmas, Alessandro Merolla, Giovanni Capone, Antonio J Orthop Traumatol Original Article BACKGROUND: Surgical treatment of scapular fractures with posterior approach is frequently associated with postoperative infraspinatus hypotrophy and weakness. The aim of this retrospective study is to compare infraspinatus strength and functional outcomes in patients treated with the classic Judet versus modified Judet approach for scapular fracture. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 20 cases with scapular neck and body fracture treated with posterior approach for lateral border plate fixation were reviewed. In 11 of 20 cases, we used the modified Judet approach (MJ group), and in 9 cases we used the classic Judet approach (CJ group). All fractures were classified according to the AO classification system. At follow-up examinations, patients had X-ray assessment with acromiohumeral distance (AHD) measurement, clinical evaluation, active range of motion (ROM) examination, Constant Shoulder Score, and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score. Infraspinatus strength assessment was measured using a dynamometer during infraspinatus strength test (IST) and infraspinatus scapular retraction test (ISRT). RESULTS: Demographic data did not significantly differ between the CJ group and MJ group, except for mean follow-up, which was 4.15 years in the CJ group and 2.33 in the MJ group (p < 0.001). All X-ray examinations showed fracture healing. AHD was significantly decreased in the CJ group (p = 0.006). We did not find significant differences in active ROM between the MJ and CJ groups in the injured arm (p < 0.05). The Constant Score was 75.83 (±14.03) in the CJ group and 82.75 (±10.72) in the MJ group (p = 0.31); DASH Score was 10.16 in the CJ group and 6.25 in the MJ group (p = 0.49). IST showed mean strength of 8.38 kg (±1.75) in the MJ group and 4.61 kg (±1.98) in the CJ group (p = 0.002), ISRT test was 8.7 (±1.64) in the MJ group and 4.95 (±2.1) in the CJ group (p = 0.002). Infraspinatus hypotrophy was detected during inspection in six patients (five in the CJ group and one in the MJ group); it was related to infraspinatus strength weakness in IST and ISRT (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach for scapular fracture avoids infraspinatus hypotrophy and external-rotation strength weakness. We suggest use of the modified Judet approach for scapular fracture and to restrict the classic Judet approach to only when the surgeon believes that the fracture is not easily reducible with a narrower exposure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV. Springer International Publishing 2018-09-05 2018-12 /pmc/articles/PMC6125251/ /pubmed/30187145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-018-0509-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Porcellini, Giuseppe
Palladini, Paolo
Congia, Stefano
Palmas, Alessandro
Merolla, Giovanni
Capone, Antonio
Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title_full Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title_fullStr Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title_full_unstemmed Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title_short Functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: Does it really make a difference?
title_sort functional outcomes and clinical strength assessment after infraspinatus-sparing surgical approach to scapular fracture: does it really make a difference?
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6125251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30187145
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s10195-018-0509-8
work_keys_str_mv AT porcellinigiuseppe functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference
AT palladinipaolo functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference
AT congiastefano functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference
AT palmasalessandro functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference
AT merollagiovanni functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference
AT caponeantonio functionaloutcomesandclinicalstrengthassessmentafterinfraspinatussparingsurgicalapproachtoscapularfracturedoesitreallymakeadifference