Modified closed-loop double-endobutton technique for repair of rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation

• Published in: Experimental and therapeutic medicine Vol. 15; no. 1; pp. 940 - 948
• Main Authors: Zhang, Lei, Zhou, Xin, Qi, Ji, Zeng, Yan, Zhang, Shaoqun, Liu, Gang, Ping, Ruiyue, Li, Yikai, Fu, Shijie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Greece Spandidos Publications 01.01.2018; D.A. Spandidos
• Subjects: Analysis; Care and treatment; Comparative analysis; Complications and side effects; Methods; Patient outcomes; Shoulder dislocation; Shoulder surgery; Treatment outcome; China; acromioclavicular joint; dislocation; closed-loop; Rockwood type III; double-endobutton
• ISSN: 1792-0981; 1792-1015
• DOI: 10.3892/etm.2017.5487

Acromioclavicular dislocation (ACD) is a common injury. According to the Rockwood classification, ACD is classified into six types (type I-VI); however, for type III injuries, it remains controversial whether or not operative treatment should be applied. Numerous studies have advocated early surgical treatment to ensure early rehabilitation activities. Thus, the present study aimed to investigate a modified closed-loop double-endobutton technique (MCDT), that may be used to repair Rockwood type III ACD. In the current study, 61 patients with Rockwood type III ACD were enrolled during a period of 5 years at the Affiliated Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital of Southwest Medical University. Patients were divided into three groups according to the surgical method used, the MCDT group (n=20), the common closed-loop double-endobutton technique (CCDT) group (n=21), and the clavicular hook plate fixation (CHPF) group (n=20). Preoperative and intraoperative information were recorded. Furthermore, the functional scores of injured shoulder were evaluated prior to surgery and following surgery with a 1-year follow-up. Among the three groups, postoperative functional scores were significantly more improved compared with those prior to surgery (P<0.05), and no significant difference was observed regarding the coracoclavicular interval with the 1-year follow-up (P>0.05). Postoperative functional scores in the MCDT and CCDT groups were significantly more improved compared those in the CHPF group (P<0.05). In addition, the duration of surgery in the MCDT group was significantly shorter compared with that in the CCDT group (P<0.05). Furthermore, compared with the CHPF group, the incision length was significantly shorter with reduced hemorrhage in the MCDT group (P<0.05). In conclusion, the results of the current study suggest that MCDT is more simple, convenient and efficient compared with CCDT, and is worth popularizing.