DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Surgical Treatment in Type III Acromioclavicular Dislocation Patients Over 45 Years - Primary Clavicular Lateral End Resection Method vs. Conventional Acromioclavicular Joint Reduction Method -

45세 이상의 제 3형 견봉쇄골 관절 탈구 환자의 수술적 치료 - 일차적 쇄골 외측단 절제 술식과 고식적인 견봉쇄골 관절 정복 술식의 비교 -

Moon Eun-Sun;Bae Bong-Hyun;Choi Jin;Kim Myung-Sun
문은선;배봉현;최진;김명선

  • Published : 2005.12.01

Abstract

Purpose: To compare and analyze the outcome of primary clavicular lateral end resection method and conventional acromioclavicular (AC) joint reduction method in type III AC dislocation patients over 45 years. Materials and Methods: This study was performed on selected 24 cases of type III AC dislocation patients, over 45 years of age, operated at our hospital from 1998 to 2002. Group I consist of 12 patients who underwent primary clavicular lateral end resection methods (average age: 54.3 years$(45{\sim}72)$). Group II consist of 7 patients using Bosworth methods and 5 patients using Phemister methods (average age: 54.4 years$(45{\sim}71)$). Clinical outcome was evaluated by Weaver and Dunn method. Radiological results were compared by measuring coracoclavicular distance between normal and injured side. Results: As clinical outcome, good was 10 cases(83%); fair 2(17%) in Group I, and good 6(50%); fair 3(25%); poor 3(25%) in Group II. In contrast, the difference of coracoclavicular distance was not statistically significant between two groups before or after surgery, and last follow up. At the last follow up, there was no special correlation between the difference of coracoclavicular distance and clinical outcome. Conclusion: We considered that primary clavicular lateral end resection may be effective for prevention of arthrosis in AC joint in type III AC dislocation patients over 45 years.

Keywords

Acromioclavicular joint dislocation;Clavicular lateral end resection;Phemister method;Bosworth method

Cited by

  1. Evaluation of the Surgical Treatment for Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Injury; Weaver and Dunn Method Versus Acromial Bone Block Transfer vol.13, pp.2, 2010, https://doi.org/10.5397/CiSE.2010.13.2.209