3. HISTORY
• primary survey
– A : speak fluently, move neck freely, no tender C-spine
– B : no dyspnea, -ve CCT, tender Rt. clavicle with stepping
– C : BP 143/78 mmHg, HR 106 bpm, no JVP engorged, -ve PCT
– D : E4V5M6, pupils 3mm RTLBE
– E : no life-threatening wound
4. HISTORY
• secondary survey
– A : no allergy
– M : amlodipine, simvastatin, no antiplatelet/anticoagulant
– P : HT, DLP F/U MNRH
– L : last meal 16.30 9/2/61
– E : MC ชนวัว ใส่หมวกกันน็อค ล้มลาตัวด้านขวาลงพื้น เจ็บหัวไหล่ขวา แขนขวาแรงดี ไม่ชา ไม่ศีรษะกระแทก ไม่สลบ จาเหตุการณ์ได้ ไม่คลื่นไส้
อาเจียน
5. PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS
• v/s : BP 143/76 mmHg, HR 106 bpm, T 36oC, SpO2 98%
• GA : A Thai man, alert, well cooperated
• HEENT : not pale, no jaundice, no bleeding per nose/ear, no raccoon eye, no Battle’s
sign
• Chest & Lungs : tender Rt. clavicle with stepping, equal chest expansion and clear
breath sound, -ve CCT
• CVS : no JVP engorged, normal S1S2, no murmur
• ABD : soft, not tender, -ve PCT
• Ext : no edema, no external wound, full ROM both arms
• Neuro : E4V5M6, pupils 3mmRTLBE, motor power gr.V all, intact PPS, CR<2 sec
12. T R E A T M E N T
1. Figure of Eight
2. F/U 3wk
3. HM : paracetamol
13.
14. MIDSHAFT
CLAVICLE
FXM C K E E , M . D . ( 2 0 1 4 ) . C L A V I C L E F R A C T U R E S .
I N R O C K W O O D A N D G R E E N ' S F R A C T U R E S I N
A D U L T S ( 8 T H E D . , V O L . 1 , P P . 1 4 2 7 - 1 4 7 0 ) .
L I P P I N C O T T W I L L I A M S & W I L K I N S
28. NON-OP VS OP
Zlowodzki, M., Zelle, B. A., Cole, P. A., Jeray, K., & McKee, M. D. (2005). Treatment of acute midshaft clavicle fractures: systematic review of 2144
fractures: on behalf of the Evidence-Based Orthopaedic Trauma Working Group. Journal of orthopaedic trauma, 19(7), 504-507.
29. NON-OP VS OP
McKee, R. C., Whelan, D. B., Schemitsch, E. H., & McKee, M. D. (2012). Operative versus nonoperative care of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures: a
meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. JBJS, 94(8), 675-684.
30. COSMETIC ISSUE
Canadian, O. T. S. (2007). Nonoperative treatment compared with plate fixation of displaced midshaft clavicular fractures. A multicenter, randomized
clinical trial. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 89(1), 1.
32. ARM SLING VS FIGURE OF EIGHT
• No difference in primary outcome
• “The application of the figure of eight bandage is more difficult than of the broad arm
sling, and patients experience more pain during the first day when treated with this
option. ”
Ersen, A., Atalar, A. C., Birisik, F., Saglam, Y., & Demirhan, M. (2015). Comparison of simple arm sling and figure of eight clavicular bandage for midshaft clavicular fractures: a
randomised controlled study. Bone Joint J, 97(11), 1562-1565.
in displaced fractures,
the sternocleidomastoid muscle pulls the medial fragment posterosuperiorly,
while pectoralis and weight of arm pull the lateral fragment inferomedially
Acromioclavicular Joint Anatomy
AC joint stability
acromioclavicular ligament
provides anterior/posterior stability
has superior, inferior, anterior, and posterior components
superior ligament is strongest, followed by posterior
coracoclavicular ligaments (trapezoid and conoid)
provides superior/inferior stability
trapezoid ligament inserts 3 cm from end of clavicle
conoid ligament inserts 4.5 cm from end of clavicle in the posterior border
conoid ligament is strongest
capsule, deltoid and trapezius act as additional stabilizers
If the clavicular fracture has occurred with minimal trauma, one must be alert to the possibility of a pathologic fracture (Fig. 38-7). Metabolic processes that weaken bone (i.e., renal disease, hyperparathyroidism), benign or malignant tumors (i.e., myeloma, metastases), or pre-existing lesions (i.e., congenital pseudarthrosis of the clavicle) can result in pathologic fracture.
as it has been reported in multiple studies to be of prognostic significance (greater shortening, especially more than 1.5 to 2 cm, is associated with a worse prognosis)
Ideally, a classification scheme should be reproducible with a low rate of inter- and intra-observer variability, should help direct treatment, can be used to predict outcome, should be useful in both the clinical and research realms, and should be simple enough to be practically useful yet robust enough to include all fracture patterns
In a meta-analysis of the literature from
FIGURE 38-1 The epidemiology of clavicle fractures in Edinburgh, Scotland. (Adapted from Robinson CM, Court-Brown CM, McQueen MM, et al. Estimating the risk of nonunion following nonoperative treatment of a clavicle fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A(7):1359–1365.)
1975 to 2005, Zlowodzki et al.209 found that the nonunion rate
for nonoperatively treated displaced midshaft clavicle fractures was 15.1%, exponentially higher than that previously described