Abstract
目的
探讨锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带治疗 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折的疗效。
方法
2010 年 1 月—2016 年 6 月使用锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带治疗 16 例 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折患者。其中男 12 例,女 4 例;年龄 14~81 岁,平均 45.6 岁。致伤原因:摔伤 10 例,交通事故伤 2 例,高处坠落伤 2 例,重物砸伤 2 例。锁骨骨折 Neer 分型:Ⅱa 型 2 例,Ⅱb 型 13 例,Ⅴ型 1 例。损伤严重程度评分(ISS)为 6~29 分,平均 11.2 分。受伤至手术时间为 1~18 d,平均 6.4 d。记录患者手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、骨折愈合情况和术后并发症;末次随访时采用上肢功能评定表(DASH)评分、肩关节 Constant 评分和牛津肩关节评分(OSS)评价肩关节功能。
结果
所有手术均顺利完成,手术时间 50~100 min,平均 75.6 min;术中出血量 30~100 mL,平均 52.8 mL;住院时间 4~47 d,平均 13.7 d。所有患者均获随访,随访时间 1.2~7.5 年,平均 3.5 年。锁骨骨折均愈合,愈合时间 9.4~13.6 周,平均 11.9 周。无骨折不愈合、骨折移位、内固定失效、切口感染等并发症发生。15 例患者于骨折愈合和功能恢复后取出锁骨钩钢板,1 例因无明显不适拒绝二次手术取出锁骨钩钢板。末次随访时,DASH 评分为 0~13 分,平均 2.2 分;肩关节 Constant 评分为 90~100 分,平均 96.8 分;OSS 评分为 12~14 分,平均 12.3 分。
结论
锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带治疗 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折可获得较好临床疗效,术后并发症少,是一种治疗不稳定锁骨远端骨折的良好方法。
Keywords: 锁骨远端骨折, 喙锁韧带, 锁骨钩钢板, 缝合锚钉
Abstract
Objective
To evaluate the effectiveness of a clavicular hook plate with coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor in the treatment of Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicle fractures.
Methods
Between January 2010 and June 2016, 16 patients with Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicle fractures were treated with clavicle hook plates and coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor. There were 12 males and 4 females with an average age of 45.6 years (range, 14-81 years). The injury mechanism included falling in 10 cases, traffic accident injury in 2 cases, falling from height in 2 cases, and heavy object injury in 2 cases. The Neer classification of clavicle fractures included 2 cases of type Ⅱa, 13 cases of type Ⅱb, and 1 case of type Ⅴ. The injury severity score (ISS) was 6-29, with an average of 11.2. The time from injury to operation was 1-18 days, with an average of 6.4 days. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization stay, fracture healing, and postoperative complications were recorded; the disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score, the shoulder joint Constant score, and the Oxford shoulder score (OSS) were used to evaluate the shoulder joint at last follow-up.
Results
All operations were successfully completed. The operation time was 50-100 minutes, with an average of 75.6 minutes; intraoperative blood loss was 30-100 mL, with an average of 52.8 mL; hospitalization stay was 4-47 days, with an average of 13.7 days. All patients were followed up 1.2-7.5 years, with an average of 3.5 years. All clavicle fractures healed, and the healing time was 9.4-13.6 weeks, with an average of 11.9 weeks. No fracture nonunion, fracture displacement, failure of internal fixation, or incision infection, etc. occurred. Fifteen patients took out the hook plate after fracture healing and functional recovery, and 1 case refused to remove the hook plate from the second operation because of no obvious discomfort. At last follow-up, the DASH score was 0-13, with an average of 2.2; the shoulder joint Constant score was 90-100, with an average of 96.8; the OSS score was 12-14, with an average of 12.3.
Conclusion
Clavicular hook plate with coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor can help achieve good effectiveness with less postoperative complication in the treatment of Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicular fractures.
Keywords: Distal clavicle fracture, coracoclavicular ligament, clavicular hook plate, suture anchor
锁骨远端骨折占锁骨骨折的 10%~30%[1]。Neer Ⅱ型和Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折通常是移位的不稳定骨折,保守治疗骨折不愈合率高,手术治疗有利于骨折复位和愈合[2]。手术方法选择较多,如锁骨钩钢板、锁定钢板、克氏针等,但目前仍无最佳治疗方案[3-4]。锁骨钩钢板是治疗锁骨远端骨折较常用的手术方法,其通过横跨肩锁关节的杠杆作用稳定远端骨折块,可以维持骨折复位进而促进骨折愈合[2];但其会触及肩峰,常带来肩峰下撞击、肩袖损伤、肩峰端骨侵蚀和内固定激惹等并发症[5-6]。缝合锚钉是一种重建喙锁韧带的内固定装置,能增强锁骨远端骨折和喙锁关节的稳定性[7-8]。有研究发现在肩锁关节脱位治疗中,喙锁韧带重建有利于维持喙锁间距和肩锁关节复位,减少锁骨钩钢板相关并发症[9-11]。目前尚缺乏锁骨钩钢板联合喙锁韧带重建治疗锁骨远端骨折的相关研究,其治疗效果和术后并发症尚不明确。因此,本研究回顾分析了我院 2010 年 1 月—2016 年 6 月采用锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉内固定治疗的 16 例 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折患者临床资料,评价治疗效果和术后并发症。报告如下。
1. 临床资料
1.1. 一般资料
纳入标准:① Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折;② 伤后 3 周内的新鲜骨折;③ 手术方式为锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉内固定;④ 无锁骨骨折史及肩部相关病史;⑤ 随访 1 年以上且临床资料完整。排除标准:① 开放骨折;② 患侧有神经血管损伤。
本组男 12 例,女 4 例;年龄 14~81 岁,平均 45.6 岁。体质量指数(body mass index,BMI)为 17.5~28.2 kg/m2,平均 22.2 kg/m2。左侧 6 例,右侧 10 例。致伤原因:摔伤 10 例,交通事故伤 2 例,高处坠落伤 2 例,重物砸伤 2 例。锁骨骨折 Neer 分型:Ⅱa 型 2 例,Ⅱb 型 13 例,Ⅴ型 1 例。损伤严重程度评分(ISS)为 6~29 分,平均 11.2 分。受伤至手术时间为 1~18 d,平均 6.4 d。患者详细资料见表 1。
表 1.
General data of patients before operation
患者术前一般资料
病例
Case |
性别
Gender |
年龄(岁)
Age (years) |
BMI
(kg/m2) |
侧别
Side |
Neer 分型
Neer typing |
致伤原因
Cause of injury |
ISS 评分
ISS score |
受伤至手术时间(d)
Time from injury to operation (days) |
1 | 男 | 14 | 17.5 | 左 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 6 | 4 |
2 | 男 | 58 | 18.6 | 右 | Ⅱb | 高处坠落伤 | 17 | 12 |
3 | 男 | 81 | 21.1 | 右 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 17 | 6 |
4 | 女 | 45 | 22.0 | 右 | Ⅱa | 高处坠落伤 | 6 | 12 |
5 | 男 | 50 | 23.5 | 左 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 6 | 2 |
6 | 男 | 42 | 19.4 | 右 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 9 | 3 |
7 | 男 | 27 | 22.5 | 右 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 9 | 6 |
8 | 男 | 64 | 28.2 | 左 | Ⅱb | 交通事故伤 | 9 | 4 |
9 | 男 | 37 | 23.0 | 右 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 6 | 1 |
10 | 男 | 42 | 21.1 | 右 | Ⅱa | 摔伤 | 6 | 1 |
11 | 女 | 39 | 17.6 | 右 | Ⅱb | 重物砸伤 | 29 | 18 |
12 | 女 | 59 | 23.0 | 左 | Ⅱb | 交通事故伤 | 6 | 12 |
13 | 男 | 31 | 22.0 | 右 | Ⅴ | 摔伤 | 27 | 8 |
14 | 男 | 58 | 24.2 | 左 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 6 | 2 |
15 | 男 | 32 | 25.8 | 左 | Ⅱb | 重物砸伤 | 14 | 8 |
16 | 女 | 50 | 25.4 | 右 | Ⅱb | 摔伤 | 6 | 4 |
1.2. 手术方法
患者于全麻下取仰卧位,抬高患侧肩部。取标准锁骨上方入路,于肩锁关节内侧、锁骨远端上方作 10 cm 左右平行于锁骨的切口,切开皮肤和筋膜层,逐层分离以暴露锁骨骨折端及患侧喙突,注意保护骨膜。使用复位钳将骨折暂时复位,将锁骨钩钢板的钩部插到肩峰下,下压并调节钩钢板轮廓,C 臂 X 线机透视检查骨折复位良好后使用锁定螺钉固定;在锁骨远端植入 1~3 枚螺钉固定远端骨折块,共需植入 4~8 枚螺钉,植钉后再次 C 臂 X 线机透视检查。将直径 3.5 mm 缝合锚钉(施乐辉公司,美国)固定于喙突底部,缝合打结加强喙锁韧带以增加锁骨远端骨折块稳定性。创面冲洗后以局部组织筋膜瓣覆盖,逐层缝合。
1.3. 术后随访及疗效评价指标
术后吊带悬吊患肢 4 周。术后第 1 天患者在可耐受疼痛范围内尝试行主被动活动,如钟摆运动、环转运动和关节活动度训练。术后 4 周在医生指导下开始行肩关节功能训练,并逐渐增加活动强度,注意肩关节外展角不能超过 90°。术后 3 个月骨折达临床愈合后开始正常活动。影像学和体格检查提示骨折达临床愈合后取出锁骨钩钢板。
术后 1、2、4 周及 3、6、12 个月定期随访。记录患者手术时间、术中出血量、住院时间、骨折愈合情况和术后并发症。末次随访时采用上肢功能评定表(DASH)评分、肩关节 Constant 评分和牛津肩关节评分(OSS)评价肩关节功能。
2. 结果
本组所有手术均顺利完成,手术时间 50~100 min,平均 75.6 min;术中出血量 30~100 mL,平均 52.8 mL;住院时间 4~47 d,平均 13.7 d。所有患者均获随访,随访时间 1.2~7.5 年,平均 3.5 年。锁骨骨折均愈合,愈合时间 9.4~13.6 周,平均 11.9 周。无骨折不愈合、骨折移位、内固定失效、切口感染等并发症发生。15 例患者于骨折愈合和功能恢复后取出锁骨钩钢板,1 例因无明显不适拒绝二次手术取出锁骨钩钢板。末次随访时,DASH 评分为 0~13 分,平均 2.2 分;肩关节 Constant 评分为 90~100 分,平均 96.8 分;OSS 评分为 12~14 分,平均 12.3 分。见表 2、图 1。
表 2.
Clinical data of patients during perioperative period and follow-up
患者围术期及随访时临床资料
病例
Case |
手术时间
(min) Operation time (minutes) |
住院时间(d)
Hospitalization stay (days) |
术中出血量
(mL) Intraoperative blood loss (mL) |
骨折愈合时间
(周) Fracture healing time (weeks) |
随访时间(年)
Follow-up time (years) |
DASH 评分
DASH score |
OSS 评分
OSS score |
Constant 评分
Constant score |
取出锁骨钩钢板
Removal of the clavicular hook plate |
1 | 89 | 10 | 35 | 9.4 | 6.8 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
2 | 76 | 19 | 50 | 13.4 | 2.6 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
3 | 91 | 11 | 60 | 13.6 | 1.7 | 3.3 | 13 | 92 | 是 |
4 | 65 | 18 | 100 | 12.7 | 1.6 | 0.8 | 14 | 94 | 是 |
5 | 69 | 6 | 50 | 13.3 | 3.5 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
6 | 100 | 8 | 60 | 9.4 | 1.7 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
7 | 74 | 12 | 40 | 9.7 | 4.9 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
8 | 83 | 9 | 50 | 11.1 | 3.6 | 6.7 | 12 | 90 | 是 |
9 | 70 | 4 | 40 | 11.9 | 1.2 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
10 | 83 | 6 | 50 | 13.1 | 1.2 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
11 | 69 | 47 | 100 | 13.3 | 6.5 | 0 | 12 | 100 | 是 |
12 | 66 | 20 | 30 | 10.7 | 7.5 | 3.0 | 12 | 94 | 是 |
13 | 83 | 18 | 35 | 11.1 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 12 | 98 | 是 |
14 | 71 | 5 | 80 | 12.7 | 1.2 | 3.0 | 12 | 96 | 是 |
15 | 70 | 18 | 35 | 12.8 | 5.0 | 13.0 | 13 | 90 | 否 |
16 | 50 | 8 | 30 | 11.9 | 4.7 | 3.0 | 12 | 94 | 是 |
图 1.
A 37-year-old male patient with right distal clavicle fracture caused by falling (Neer type Ⅱb)
患者,男,37 岁,摔伤致右锁骨远端骨折(Neer Ⅱb 型)
a. 术前 X 线片;b. 术后即刻 X 线片示骨折复位满意;c. 术后 4 个月取出锁骨钩钢板后 X 线示骨折愈合良好;d~f. 术后 1 年肩关节功能
a. Preoperative X-ray film; b. Postoperative X-ray film immediately showed good reduction of clavicle fracture; c. X-ray film showed good fracture healing after removing the clavicular hook plate at 4 months after operation; d-f. Shoulder joint function at 1 year after operation
3. 讨论
3.1. 肩锁关节解剖学特点
肩锁关节是位于肩峰端和锁骨远端的微动关节,肩锁韧带和喙锁韧带分别主要维持其前后水平和垂直方向上的稳定性。Neer Ⅱ型和Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折通常伴有喙锁韧带损伤,由于失去了喙锁韧带的稳定作用,锁骨远端骨折块容易受到邻近肌肉牵拉而发生移位。锁骨骨折近端会受斜方肌和胸锁乳突肌的牵拉向上方移位,骨折远端则受背阔肌、胸大肌牵拉及患侧上肢自重的牵拉而向下方移位[12]。移位的不稳定锁骨远端骨折经保守治疗后,骨折不愈合率高达 18%~43%,因此通常需要手术治疗以获得骨折良好复位和功能康复[1, 4]。
3.2. 锁骨钩钢板治疗优势
目前不稳定锁骨远端骨折的手术治疗方法包括坚强内固定(钩钢板、锁定钢板等)、弹性内固定(张力带钢丝等)和肩锁韧带重建(缝合锚钉、Endobutton 固定等)[13-15]。与锁定钢板等其他内固定物相比,锁骨钩钢板更接近于肩锁关节的生物力学特点,对锁骨远端骨折块有更好的稳定作用,能够有效维持肩锁关节复位和减少骨折块移位,常被用于锁骨远端骨折内固手术[3, 10, 16]。Baunach 等[17]对接受锁骨钩钢板治疗的 Neer Ⅱ型锁骨骨折患者长期随访,发现所有患者骨折均愈合,肩关节功能恢复良好,术后并发症发生率低。锁骨钩钢板可以通过横跨肩锁关节稳定喙锁关节,利用杠杆作用减小骨折部位受到的应力,并同时稳定粉碎骨折块,从而保证骨折有效复位[2]。本研究分析了锁骨钩钢板联合喙锁韧带重建治疗 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折的效果,术后所有患者骨折愈合良好,随访过程中均未出现骨折移位、骨折不愈合等并发症。
3.3. 锁骨钩钢板联合喙锁韧带重建治疗优势
锁骨远端骨折块失去喙锁韧带的限制和斜方肌等邻近肌肉的牵拉,是导致 Neer Ⅱ型和Ⅴ型锁骨骨折不稳定的重要因素。生物力学研究证实喙锁韧带重建可以增强锁骨远端骨折块的稳定性,从而减少骨折块移位[18-19]。喙锁韧带重建有助于恢复肩锁关节解剖结构,促进韧带损伤愈合,维持喙锁稳定,且损伤神经血管风险较低[20-21]。在 Neer Ⅱb 型锁骨骨折治疗中,Xu 等[7]对 16 例患者仅使用锁定钢板治疗,对 18 例患者采用锁定钢板联合缝合锚钉(直径 3.5 mm)治疗,结果显示缝合锚钉重建组骨折愈合更快且肩关节功能恢复更佳。Fan 等[22]在 28 例 Neer Ⅱ型锁骨骨折治疗中发现,锁定钢板联合缝合锚钉(直径 5 mm)比单纯使用锁定钢板获得了更好的骨折复位和临床功能评分。锁定钢板对锁骨远端骨折的固定能力弱于锁骨钩钢板,尤其是在锁骨远端骨折块很小、螺钉数目有限、严重骨质疏松时[23]。因此,本研究选用锁骨钩钢板进行固定,术中联合应用缝合锚钉来增强锁骨远端骨折块和喙锁关节的稳定性。术后 X 线片检查未见骨折移位,末次随访时 DASH 评分、肩关节 Constant 评分和 OSS 评分结果说明肩关节功能恢复良好。
3.4. 喙锁韧带重建与锁骨钩钢板相关并发症
锁骨钩钢板虽然比其他内固定方法能更好地固定锁骨远端小骨折块,但术后并发症发生率高达 40%~50%[24]。Deng 等[25]发现锁骨钩钢板的钩部能显著减小肩峰下间隙,术后容易出现肩峰下关节面与钢板之间的摩擦,也容易发生肱骨大结节与锁骨钩钢板外侧钩的撞击[26]。喙锁韧带主要通过限制锁骨在垂直方向上的移位来维持锁骨稳定性。缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带能够对抗锁骨远端骨折块和锁骨钩钢板在垂直方向上受到的肌肉牵拉力,从而减少锁骨外侧钩与肩峰下关节面和肱骨大结节之间的摩擦与碰撞。Chang 等[10]在急性肩锁关节脱位治疗中发现,喙锁韧带重建能够减少锁骨钩钢板对肩峰端骨的侵蚀。Yin 等[11]在治疗急性 Rockwood Ⅲ型和 Ⅴ 型肩锁关节脱位患者时发现,锁骨钩钢板联合喙锁韧带重建比单纯锁骨钩钢板具有更好的总体疗效和更少术后并发症。Liu 等[27]对急性 Rockwood Ⅴ 型肩锁关节脱位患者采用锁骨钩钢板联合喙锁韧带增强术治疗,与单纯使用锁骨钩钢板治疗者相比,前者在锁骨钩钢板取出前 Constant-Murley 功能评分更高,影像学上肩峰骨溶解和种植体周围骨折发生率明显降低。本组 15 例患者在骨折愈合后及时取出锁骨钩钢板,1 例因无明显不适而未取出,随访过程中未出现手术相关并发症。因此,我们分析缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带可能会减少锁骨远端骨折内固定术后锁骨钩钢板引起的并发症;及时取出锁骨钩钢板有利于肩关节功能恢复[28]。此外,锁骨钩钢板的塑形和钩部深度等与术后并发症的发生有关[29],应根据患者肩锁关节和肩峰的解剖特点选择合适规格的锁骨钩钢板并适当塑形。
3.5. 本研究局限性
尽管喙锁韧带重建有利于维持喙锁间距,防止骨折移位,但有文献报道喙锁间距的维持并不一定有更好的临床功能[30],因此喙锁韧带重建在锁骨远端骨折治疗中的必要性仍存在一定争议。汤红伟等[31]对 40 例 NeerⅡb 型锁骨骨折患者分别使用锁定钢板联合缝合锚钉(18 例)和单纯锁定钢板(22 例)治疗,两组患者在骨折愈合和功能康复方面均无统计学差异。Salazar 等[32]在对 16 例 NeerⅡ型和Ⅴ型锁骨远端骨折患者的治疗中发现,单纯使用锁定钢板和锁定钢板联合喙锁韧带悬吊加强术的疗效相近;此外,缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带存在一些缺点,如创伤增加、手术费用增多、手术时间延长等。由于大多数研究都是单中心、小样本回顾性研究,往往存在一定选择偏倚和信息偏倚,尚需要前瞻性随机对照研究进一步证实锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉重建喙锁韧带的疗效。
综上述,锁骨钩钢板联合缝合锚钉治疗 Neer Ⅱ型或Ⅴ型锁骨骨折有较好的临床疗效,能实现锁骨远端骨折愈合和肩关节功能恢复,术后并发症发生率低,为不稳定锁骨远端骨折的治疗提供了新思路。
作者贡献:吴双负责数据收集、分析和文章撰写;项舟、陈家磊负责课题设计、指导督促课题开展及修改文章;陈家磊、张洁负责整理文献、收集和整理课题数据;Sujan Shakya、邢飞负责随访、数据分析和文章校对。
利益冲突:所有作者声明,在课题研究和文章撰写过程中不存在利益冲突。课题经费支持没有影响文章观点和对研究数据客观结果的统计分析及其报道。
机构伦理问题:研究方案经四川大学华西医院生物医学伦理委员会批准[2019 年审(865)号]。患者均知情同意。
Funding Statement
国家自然科学基金资助项目(31870961)
National Natural Science Foundation of China (31870961)
References
- 1.Kim DW, Kim DH, Kim BS, et al Current concepts for classification and treatment of distal clavicle fractures. Clin Orthop Surg. 2020;12(2):135–144. doi: 10.4055/cios20010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Ochen Y, Frima H, Houwert RM, et al Surgical treatment of Neer type Ⅱ and type Ⅴ lateral clavicular fractures: comparison of hook plate versus superior plate with lateral extension: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2019;29(5):989–997. doi: 10.1007/s00590-019-02411-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Frima H, van Heijl M, Michelitsch C, et al Clavicle fractures in adults; current concepts. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020;46(3):519–529. doi: 10.1007/s00068-019-01122-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Moverley R, Little N, Gulihar A, et al Current concepts in the management of clavicle fractures. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020;11(Suppl 1):S25–S30. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.07.016. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Wang HK, Liang LS, He RG, et al. Comparative analysis of locking plates versus hook plates in the treatment of Neer type Ⅱ distal clavicle fractures. J Int Med Res, 2020, 48(4): 300060520918060. doi: 10.1177/0300060520918060.
- 6.Qiao R, Yang J, Zhang K, et al. To explore the reasonable selection of clavicular hook plate to reduce the occurrence of subacromial impingement syndrome after operation. J Orthop Surg Res, 2021, 16(1): 180. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02325-5.
- 7.Xu H, Chen WJ, Zhi XC, et al. Comparison of the efficacy of a distal clavicular locking plate with and without a suture anchor in the treatment of Neer Ⅱb distal clavicle fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2019, 20(1): 503. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-2892-6.
- 8.Nüchtern JV, Sellenschloh K, Bishop N, et al Biomechanical evaluation of 3 stabilization methods on acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(6):1387–1394. doi: 10.1177/0363546513484892. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Seo JB, Kim SJ, Ham HJ, et al. Comparison between hook plate fixation with and without coracoclavicular ligament suture for acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong), 2020, 28(1): 2309499020905058. doi: 10.1177/2309499020905058.
- 10.Chang HM, Hong CK, Su WR, et al Comparison of clavicular hook plate with and without coracoclavicular suture fixation for acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2019;53(6):408–413. doi: 10.1016/j.aott.2019.08.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Yin J, Yin Z, Gong G, et al Comparison of hook plate with versus without double-tunnel coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction for repair of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Int J Surg. 2018;54(Pt A):18–23. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2018.04.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Renger RJ, Roukema GR, Reurings JC, et al The clavicle hook plate for Neer type Ⅱ lateral clavicle fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(8):570–574. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e318193d878. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ropars M, Thomazeau H, Huten D Clavicle fractures. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017;103(1S):S53–S59. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2016.11.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Boonard M, Sumanont S, Arirachakaran A, et al Fixation method for treatment of unstable distal clavicle fracture: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2018;28(6):1065–1078. doi: 10.1007/s00590-018-2187-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Wang J, Guan J, Liu M, et al. Treatment of distal clavicle fracture of Neer type Ⅱ with locking plate in combination with titanium cable under the guide. Sci Rep, 2021, 11(1): 4949. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-84601-2.
- 16.Brouwer KM, Wright TC, Ring DC Failure of superior locking clavicle plate by axial pull-out of the lateral screws: a report of four cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(1):e22–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.05.042. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Baunach D, Eid K, Ricks M, et al. Long-term clinical and radiological results after hook plate osteosynthesis of lateral clavicle fractures. J Orthop Trauma, 2020. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002007.
- 18.Alaee F, Apostolakos J, Singh H, et al Lateral clavicle fracture with coracoclavicular ligament injury: a biomechanical study of 4 different repair techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(7):2013–2019. doi: 10.1007/s00167-017-4444-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Madsen W, Yaseen Z, LaFrance R, et al Addition of a suture anchor for coracoclavicular fixation to a superior locking plate improves stability of type ⅡB distal clavicle fractures. Arthroscopy. 2013;29(6):998–1004. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Choi S, Lee TJ, Kim MK, et al. Midterm results of coracoclavicular stabilization with double augmentation for acute acromioclavicular dislocation. Springerplus, 2016, 5(1): 1858. doi: 10.1186/s40064-016-3527-0.
- 21.Mirbolook A, Sadat M, Golbakhsh M, et al Distal clavicular fracture treatment with suture anchor method. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2016;50(3):298–302. doi: 10.3944/AOTT.2015.15.0023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Fan J, Zhang Y, Huang Q, et al Comparison of treatment of acute unstable distal clavicle fractures using anatomical locking plates with versus without additional suture anchor fixation. Med Sci Monit. 2017;23:5455–5461. doi: 10.12659/MSM.903440. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Lee W, Choi CH, Choi YR, et al Clavicle hook plate fixation for distal-third clavicle fracture (Neer type Ⅱ): comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between Neer types ⅡA and ⅡB. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;26(7):1210–1215. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.11.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Lopiz Y, Checa P, García-Fernández C, et al Complications with the clavicle hook plate after fixation of Neer type Ⅱ clavicle fractures. Int Orthop. 2019;43(7):1701–1708. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4108-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Deng Z, Cai L, Ping A, et al Anatomical research on the subacromial interval following implantation of clavicle hook plates. Int J Sports Med. 2014;35(10):857–862. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1367050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Lin HY, Wong PK, Ho WP, et al. Clavicular hook plate may induce subacromial shoulder impingement and rotator cuff lesion—dynamic sonographic evaluation. J Orthop Surg Res, 2014, 9: 6. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-9-6.
- 27.Liu CT, Yang TF. Hook plate with or without coracoclavicular ligament augmentation in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular separation. BMC Musculoskelet Disord, 2020, 21(1): 701. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03726-z.
- 28.Zhang L, Xiao H, Gao Y, et al Late function and complications of hook plate implantation for distal-third clavicle fractures: a retrospective study. Acta Orthop Belg. 2018;84(4):485–490. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Wu K, Su X, Roche SJL, et al. Relationship between the lateral acromion angle and postoperative persistent pain of distal clavicle fracture treated with clavicle hook plate. J Orthop Surg Res, 2020, 15(1): 217. doi: 10.1186/s13018-020-01737-z.
- 30.Shin SJ, Kim NK Complications after arthroscopic coracoclavicular reconstruction using a single adjustable-loop-length suspensory fixation device in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(5):816–824. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.11.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.汤红伟, 殷勇, 韩擎天, 徐小平, 李云飞 解剖锁定钢板内固定联合喙锁韧带重建治疗 Neer Ⅱb 型锁骨远端骨折的疗效研究. 中国修复重建外科杂志. 2018;32(9):1181–1186. doi: 10.7507/1002-1892.201803127. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Salazar BP, Chen MJ, Bishop JA, et al Outcomes after locking plate fixation of distal clavicle fractures with and without coracoclavicular ligament augmentation. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2021;31(3):473–479. doi: 10.1007/s00590-020-02797-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]