Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation with Ipsilateral Mid Third Clavicle, Mid Shaft Humerus and Coracoid Process Fracture - A Case Report

Monopolar and Bipolar Combination Injuries of the Clavicle: Retrospective Incidence Analysis and Proposal of a New Classification System

Clavicle injuries are common, but only few case reports describe combined clavicular injuries (CCI). CCI include combinations between clavicular fractures and acromioclavicular/sternoclavicular joint dislocations (SCJD). We present the first general therapeutic recommendations for CCI based on a new classification and their distribution. A retrospective, epidemiological, big data analysis was based on ICD-10 diagnoses from 2012 to 2014 provided by the German Federal Statistical Office. CCI represent 0.7% of all clavicle-related injuries (n = 814 out of 114,003). SCJD show by far the highest proportion of combination injuries (13.2% of all SCJD were part of CCI) while the proportion of CCI in relation to the other injury entities was significantly less (p < 0.023). CCIs were classified depending on (1) the polarity (monopolar type I, 92.2% versus bipolar type II, 7.8%). Monopolar type I was further differentiated depending on (2) the positional relationship between the combined injuries: Ia two injuries directly at the respective pole versus Ib with an injury at one end plus an additional midshaft clavicle fracture. Type II was further differentiated depending on (3) the injured structures: IIa ligamento-osseous, type IIb purely ligamentous (rarest with 0.6%). According to our classification, the CCI severity increases from type Ia to IIb. CCI are more important than previously believed and seen as an indication for surgery. The exclusion of further, contra-polar injuries in the event of a clavicle injury is clinically relevant and should be focused.

Fractures of the coracoid process: a systematic review

Background

Although fracture of the coracoid process (CF) used to be considered rare, it is now more commonly encountered due to increased awareness and advances in imaging methods. This review aimed to analyze reported cases of CF to determine its mechanism and appropriate treatment.

Methods

PubMed and Scopus were searched using the terms "scapula fracture" and "coracoid fracture." The inclusion criteria were English full-text articles concerning CF that described patient characteristics with appropriate images. The exclusion criteria included cases without appropriate images and those with physeal injury or nonunion. Citation tracking was conducted to find additional articles and notable full-text articles in other languages. Fractures were mainly classified using Ogawa's classification.

Results

Ninety-seven studies were identified, including 197 patients (131 men, 33 women; average age 37.0±16.9 years). CF was classified as type I in 77%, type II in 19%, and avulsion fracture at the angle in 5%. Concurrent shoulder girdle injuries included acromioclavicular injury in 33%, clavicular fracture in 17%, acromion or lateral scapular spine fracture in 15%, and anterior shoulder instability in 11%. Among patients with type I CF, 69% had multiple disruptions of the superior shoulder suspensory complex. Conservative treatment was applied in 71% of isolated type I CF, while surgical treatment was applied in 76% of type I CF with multiple disruptions. Although the evaluation methods varied, 60% of patients were followed up for more than 6 months, and the outcomes were generally satisfactory for both conservative and surgical treatments.

Conclusion

CF occurred commonly in the age group with higher social activity. The most common fracture type was type I. The possible mechanism of CF is violent traction of the attached muscles, except for avulsion fracture at the angle. Type I CF with multiple disruptions of the superior shoulder suspensory complex requires surgical treatment, whereas conservative care is recommended for isolated type I and type II CFs.