Operative treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries graded Rockwood III and IV: risks and benefits in tight rope technique vs. k-wire fixation

Patient Safety in Surgery

Hans-Christoph Pape¹  Philipp Kobbe¹  Richard Martin Sellei¹  Miguel Pishnamaz¹  Thomas Dienstknecht¹  Klemens Horst¹ 

[1] Department of Orthopedic Trauma Surgery, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Paulwelsstreet 30, Aachen, 52074, Germany

关键词: Analysis;    Comparison;    Surgery;    Reconstruction;    Acromioclavicular joint dislocation;    Costs;    K-wires;    Tight rope technique;   

Others  :  790306
DOI  :  10.1186/1754-9493-7-18

 received in 2013-04-05, accepted in 2013-05-22,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Operative treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries is recommended for higher degree dislocations. Recently a new option has become available with the minimally-invasive tight rope technique. Whereas clinical studies justify the medical use, risks and benefits remain unclear. Therefore, this study analyzed these facts associated with this procedure and compared them to K-wire fixation.

Material and Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed of patients surgically treated either with the TightRope™-technique (TR) or K-wires (KW) for a first event isolated Rockwood type III or higher acromioclavicular joint dislocation between 2004 and 2011. Timing for surgery, surgical duration, length of hospital stay, costs, complications and outpatient visits were recorded.

Results

41 patients were included (TR: n = 18; KW: n = 23) with comparable demographics and injury severity. A trend towards shorter operation time was seen in the TR group (TR: 64.3 ±19.8 min. vs. KW: 80.9 ±33.7 min., n.s.) A tendency for lower total operation theater costs was seen in the TR group (TR: 474 ±436.5€ vs. KW: 749.1 ±31.2€, n.s.). Patients from the TR group left hospital earlier (TR: 2 ±1d vs. KW: 3.6 ±1.8d, p = 0.002). Severe complications (i.e. a fracture of the clavicle or nerve damage) occurred in neither of the groups. Early loss of reduction (n = 1) and impaired wound healing (n = 2) was seen in the TR group. Migrating K-wires (n = 4), loss of reduction (n = 1) and impingement syndrome (n = 1) were recorded in the KW group.

Conclusion

Usage of the tight rope technique offered advantages, such as being a safe minimally-invasive technique and showed a tendency towards shorter operation time, and lower physician- and total operation and theater costs. Material costs were significantly higher for this device but patients were discharged earlier. The influence of different clinical long-term results on the financial outcome needs to be evaluated in further studies.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Horst et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Clayton RA, Court-Brown CM: The epidemiology of musculoskeletal tendinous and ligamentous injuries. Injury 2008, 39(12):1338-1344.
• [2]Weigel B, Nerlich M: Praxisbuch Unfallchirurgie. Erding/Regensburg: Springer; 2011.
• [3]Rockwood CA, Williams GR, Young DC: Fractures in adults: acromioclavicular injuries. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1996:1341-1413.
• [4]Bradley JP, Elkousy H: Decision making: operative versus nonoperative treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries. Clin Sports Med 2003, 22(2):277-290.
• [5]Leidel BA, Braunstein V, Kirchhoff C, Pilotto S, Mutschler W, Biberthaler P: Consistency of long-term outcome of acute Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular joint separations after K-wire transfixation. J Trauma 2009, 66(6):1666-1671.
• [6]Ejam S, Lind T, Falkenberg B: Surgical treatment of acute and chronic acromioclavicular dislocation Tossy type III and V using the Hook plate. Acta Orthop Belg 2008, 74(4):441-445.
• [7]Eberle C, Fodor P, Metzger U: Hook plate (so-called Balser plate) or tension banding with the Bosworth screw in complete acromioclavicular dislocation and clavicular fracture. Z Unfallchir Versicherungsmed 1992, 85(3):134-139.
• [8]Weitzmann G: Treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation by a modified Bosworth method. Report on twenty-four cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1967, 49:1167-1178.
• [9]Salzmann GM, Walz L, Schoettle PB, Imhoff AB: Arthroscopic anatomical reconstruction of the acromioclavicular joint. Acta Orthop Belg 2008, 74(3):397-400.
• [10]Eschler A, Gradl G, Gierer P, Mittlmeier T, Beck M: Hook plate fixation for acromioclavicular joint separations restores coracoclavicular distance more accurately than PDS augmentation, however presents with a high rate of acromial osteolysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012, 132(1):33-39.
• [11]Li BC, Zhang M, Shi D, Yang ZX, Zhu CM: [Postoperative complications of acromioclavicular joint dislocation of Tossy III]. Zhongguo Gu Shang 2009, 22(2):95-97.
• [12]El Sallakh SA: Evaluation of arthroscopic stabilization of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation using the TightRope system. Orthopedics 2012, 35(1):e18-e22.
• [13]Ammon JT, Voor MJ, Tillett ED: A biomechanical comparison of Bosworth and poly-L lactic acid bioabsorbable screws for treatment of acromioclavicular separations. Arthroscopy 2005, 21(12):1443-1446.
• [14]Jerosch J, Filler T, Peuker E, Greig M, Siewering U: Which stabilization technique corrects anatomy best in patients with AC-separation? An experimental study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1999, 7(6):365-372.
• [15]Wellmann M, Lodde I, Schanz S, Zantop T, Raschke MJ, Petersen W: Biomechanical evaluation of an augmented coracoacromial ligament transfer for acromioclavicular joint instability. Arthroscopy 2008, 24(12):1395-1401.
• [16]Thomas K, Litsky A, Jones G, Bishop JY: Biomechanical comparison of coracoclavicular reconstructive techniques. Am J Sports Med 2011, 39(4):804-810.
• [17]McConnell AJ, Yoo DJ, Zdero R, Schemitsch EH, McKee MD: Methods of operative fixation of the acromio-clavicular joint: a biomechanical comparison. J Orthop Trauma 2007, 21(4):248-253.
• [18]Scheibel M, Droschel S, Gerhardt C, Kraus N: Arthroscopically assisted stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations. Am J Sports Med 2011, 39(7):1507-1516.
• [19]Patzer T, Clauss C, Kuhne CA, Ziring E, Efe T, Ruchholtz S, et al.: [Arthroscopically assisted reduction of acute acromioclavicular joint separations: comparison of clinical and radiological results of single versus double TightRope technique]. Unfallchirurg 2013, 116(5):442-450.
• [20]Statistisches Bundesamt BRD 2010: Stationäre Krankenhauskosten je Fall auf 3854 Euro gestiegen. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt; 2011. cited 2011 11.11.2011. Available from: [http://www.destatis.de webcite]
• [21]Colegate-Stone T, Roslee C, Shetty S, Compson J, Sinha J, Tavakkolizadeh A: Audit of trauma case load suitable for a day surgery trauma list and cost analysis. Surgeon 2011, 9(5):241-244.
• [22]Basso O: Cost analysis of a system of ad hoc theatre sessions for the management of delayed trauma cases. J Orthop Traumatol 2009, 10(2):91-96.
• [23]Meneghini RM, Smits SA: Early discharge and recovery with three minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty approaches: a preliminary study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467(6):1431-1437.
• [24]Munk S, Dalsgaard J, Bjerggaard K, Andersen I, Hansen TB, Kehlet H: Early recovery after fast-track Oxford unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2012, 83(1):41-45.
• [25]Thiel E, Mutnal A, Gilot GJ: Surgical outcome following arthroscopic fixation of acromioclavicular joint disruption with the tightrope device. Orthopedics 2011, 34(7):e267-e274.
• [26]Motta P, Maderni A, Bruno L, Mariotti U: Suture rupture in acromioclavicular joint dislocations treated with flip buttons. Arthroscopy 2011, 27(2):294-298.
• [27]Press J, Zuckerman JD, Gallagher M, Cuomo F: Treatment of grade III acromioclavicular separations. Operative versus nonoperative management. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 1997, 56(2):77-83.