Accurate characterisation of fractures is essential in fracture management trials. However, this is often hampered by poor inter-observer agreement. This article describes the practicalities of defining the fracture population, based on the Neer classification, within a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial in which surgical treatment was compared with non-surgical treatment in adults with displaced fractures of the proximal humerus involving the surgical neck. The trial manual illustrated the Neer classification of proximal humeral fractures. However, in addition to surgical neck displacement, surgeons assessing patient eligibility reported on whether either or both of the tuberosities were involved. Anonymised electronic versions of baseline radiographs were sought for all 250 trial participants. A protocol, data collection tool and training presentation were developed and tested in a pilot study. These were then used in a formal assessment and classification of the trial fractures by two independent senior orthopaedic shoulder trauma surgeons.Objectives
Methods
Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is
a relatively common injury and a number of surgical interventions
have been described for its treatment. Recently, a synthetic ligament
device has become available and been successfully used, however,
like other non-native solutions, a compromise must be reached when
choosing non-anatomical locations for their placement. This cadaveric
study aimed to assess the effect of different clavicular anchorage points
for the Lockdown device on the reduction of acromioclavicular joint
dislocations, and suggest an optimal location. We also assessed
whether further stability is provided using a coracoacromial ligament
transfer (a modified Neviaser technique). The acromioclavicular
joint was exposed on seven fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. The
joint was reconstructed using the Lockdown implant using four different
clavicular anchorage points and reduction was measured. The coracoacromial
ligament was then transferred to the lateral end of the clavicle,
and the joint re-assessed. If the Lockdown ligament was secured
at the level of the conoid tubercle, the acromioclavicular joint
could be reduced anatomically in all cases. If placed medial or
2 cm lateral, the joint was irreducible. If the Lockdown was placed
1 cm lateral to the conoid tubercle, the joint could be reduced
with difficulty in four cases. Correct placement of the Lockdown
device is crucial to allow anatomical joint reduction. Even when the
Lockdown was placed over the conoid tubercle, anterior clavicle
displacement remained but this could be controlled using a coracoacromial
ligament transfer. Cite this article:
