Cargando…

Modified Double‐Row and Double‐Pulley Technique for the Treatment of Type Ia Scapular Glenoid Fractures

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of the double‐row and double‐pulley technique in treating anterior shoulder glenoid fracture (Ideberg type Ia) using shoulder arthroscopy. METHODS: Thirty‐six patients with Ideberg type Ia admitted from March 1, 2017, to March 1, 2020, were retrospectively reviewe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Yizhong, Li, Qingxian, Zhang, Qingsong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9251277/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35638594
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/os.13305
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of the double‐row and double‐pulley technique in treating anterior shoulder glenoid fracture (Ideberg type Ia) using shoulder arthroscopy. METHODS: Thirty‐six patients with Ideberg type Ia admitted from March 1, 2017, to March 1, 2020, were retrospectively reviewed. Data of the patients' history included age, sex, side of the affected arm, the mean time from injury to surgery, the surgical duration, the average blood loss, and the average total duration of hospital stay. The double‐row and double‐pulley technique was used to repair the scapular glenoid fracture under arthroscopy. Computed tomography (CT) was used to evaluate fracture healing after surgery. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder joint scoring system, and the Constant–Murley shoulder function score were used to assess the function of the affected shoulder. RESULTS: The surgical duration was 90–150 min, with a mean of 127 min. The average blood loss was 90 mL (range, 60–120 mL), and the average total duration of hospital stay was 9.2 days (range, 3 to 14 days). At 9 months after surgery, the CT results showed that all fractures healed, and all patients returned to their previous levels of activity and regained an excellent range of motion. The visual analog scale (VAS) score was 7.55 ± 1.32 before surgery, and the VAS score significantly decreased to 1.24 ± 0.72 at 12 months after the operation (p < 0.05). The Constant, ASES, and UCLA shoulder function scores were 44.38 ± 2.16, 43.47 ± 12.76, and 21.80 ± 1.16 before the surgery, respectively, which improved to 93.52 ± 2.82, 91.34 ± 8.28, and 33.24 ± 1.64, respectively, in the following 12 months. One patient experienced fat liquefaction. However, no cases of deep venous thrombosis, iatrogenic neurovascular compromise, wound infection, or neurovascular injury were identified. CONCLUSION: The double‐row and double‐pulley technique for treating Ideberg type Ia under shoulder arthroscopy has minor surgical trauma, reliable fracture reduction and fixation, less postoperative pain, and fewer postoperative complications and significantly improves the patient's shoulder joint function.