Inselspital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Shoulder, Elbow and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Bern University Hospital, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
Shoulder, Elbow and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Orthopaedics Sonnenhof, Bern, Switzerland.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020 Aug;29(8):1599-1605. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.12.014. Epub 2020 Mar 5.
Accurate classification and subsequent management of acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries remains a contentious topic. The updated Rockwood classification acknowledges "stable IIIA" and "unstable IIIB" injuries, a watershed accepted by ISAKOS and important in guiding clinical management. Traditionally, the coracoclavicular distance is used to classify these injuries, despite well-documented limitations. This study aimed to evaluate displacement in AC joint injuries by measuring both coracoclavicular (CC) distance and the newly proposed acromial center line to dorsal clavicle (AC-DC) distance, in a cohort of patients, and correlate the results between the 2 measurements and relationship to Rockwood grade.
Ninety consecutive cases of AC joint injury were evaluated radiographically for Rockwood classification, CC distance on anteroposterior radiographs, and AC-DC distance on Alexander view radiographs. Inter- and intraobserver reliability for each measurement was calculated as well as correlation between the 2 measurement types and the degree to which each measurement accurately represented the Rockwood classification.
Although both CC and AC-DC measurements showed very high inter- and intraobserver reliability, the CC distance systematically underestimated the degree of AC joint displacement when compared with the AC-DC measurement as the severity of injury increased, particularly in the presence of posterior horizontal displacement such as that seen in Rockwood IV injuries.
The AC-DC measurement and use of the Alexander view provides the clinician with a more realistic appreciation of true AC joint displacement, especially in defining watershed cases (ie, IIIA/IIB/IV) and may better inform the decision-making process regarding management options and recommendations.
准确分类和后续管理肩锁关节(AC)损伤仍然是一个有争议的话题。更新后的 Rockwood 分类法承认“稳定的 IIIA”和“不稳定的 IIIB”损伤,这是 ISAKOS 认可的分水岭,对指导临床管理很重要。传统上,使用肩锁关节距离来分类这些损伤,尽管有充分的记录限制。本研究旨在通过测量 AC 关节损伤的肩锁关节(CC)距离和新提出的肩峰中心到锁骨背侧(AC-DC)距离,评估 AC 关节损伤的移位情况,在一组患者中,并将两种测量方法的结果与 Rockwood 分级进行相关性分析。
对 90 例连续的 AC 关节损伤患者进行影像学评估,包括 Rockwood 分类、前后位 X 线片上的 CC 距离和 Alexander 位 X 线片上的 AC-DC 距离。计算了每种测量方法的组内和组间可靠性,以及两种测量方法之间的相关性,以及每种测量方法对 Rockwood 分级的准确性。
尽管 CC 和 AC-DC 测量都显示出非常高的组内和组间可靠性,但随着损伤程度的增加,CC 距离系统地低估了 AC 关节移位的程度,特别是在存在后向水平移位时,如 Rockwood IV 损伤中所见。
AC-DC 测量和使用 Alexander 位为临床医生提供了对真实 AC 关节移位的更真实的评估,特别是在定义分水岭病例(即 IIIA/IIIB/IV)时,并且可能更好地为管理选项和建议的决策过程提供信息。