header advert
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 7 | Pages 918 - 924
1 Jul 2020
Rosslenbroich SB Heimann K Katthagen JC Koesters C Riesenbeck O Petersen W Raschke MJ Schliemann B

Aims

There is a lack of long-term data for minimally invasive acromioclavicular (AC) joint repair. Furthermore, it is not clear if good early clinical results can be maintained over time. The purpose of this study was to report long-term results of minimally invasive AC joint reconstruction (MINAR) and compare it to corresponding short-term data.

Methods

We assessed patients with a follow-up of at least five years after minimally invasive flip-button repair for high-grade AC joint dislocation. The clinical outcome was evaluated using the Constant score and a questionnaire. Ultrasound determined the coracoclavicular (CC) distance. Results of the current follow-up were compared to the short-term results of the same cohort.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 94-B, Issue SUPP_XXXVII | Pages 174 - 174
1 Sep 2012
Katthagen JC Voigt C Jensen G Lill H
Full Access

Implant removal is necessary in up to 25% of patients with plate osteosynthesis after proximal humeral fracture. Our new technique of arthroscopic implant removal offers all advantages of minimal invasive surgery. Additionally treatment of concomitant intraarticular lesions is possible. This study outlines the first results after arthroscopic implant removal in comparison with those of open implant removal.

A prospective series of 40 consecutive treated patients had implant removal and arthrolysis after plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fracture. Implant removal was carried out due to limitation in range of movement, secondary implant dislocation and implant impingement. 30 patients (median age 63 (30–82) years) had arthroscopic, ten patients (median age 53 (34–76) years) had open implant removal. Median 10 months after implant removal subjective patient satisfaction, Constant Murley Score (CMS) and Simple Shoulder Test were determined.

Arthroscopic implant removal showed comparable first results as open implant removal. There was no significant difference between CMS of both groups. The active shoulder abduction, flexion and external rotation improved significantly after arthroscopic and open implant removal. The simple shoulder test outlined advantages for the arthroscopic technique. After arthroscopic implant removal patients showed higher subjective satisfaction as well as faster pain reduction and mobilization. Analysis of perioperative data showed less blood loss in the group with arthroscopic implant removal. In 85% of patients with arthroscopic implant removal concomitant intraarticular lesions were observed and treated.

The arthroscopic implant removal after plate osteosynthesis of proximal humeral fractures offers all advantages of minimal invasive surgery and comparable first results as the open implant removal. The subjective and objective satisfaction of patients is high. The technique can be applied and established by all arthroscopic trained shoulder surgeons.