Trends in the Surgical Management of Acromioclavicular Joint Arthritis Among Board-Eligible US Orthopaedic Surgeons

A systematic review of the treatment of primary acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis

Background

This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarise and present the available evidence for the treatment of primary acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) osteoarthritis (OA).

Methods

Five databases were searched for studies investigating the management of ACJ OA. Included were studies with participants with clinical/radiological signs of primary ACJ OA, an intervention and included a functional outcome measure.

Results

Forty-eight studies were included. Treatments consisted of physiotherapy (n = 1 study), medical only (n = 11) and operative management (n = 36). Operative studies included five comparative trials - physiotherapy versus surgery (n = 1) and open versus arthroscopic resection (n = 4). A total of 1902 shoulders were treated for ACJ OA, mean age (51 years), 58% male and mean follow-up (28.5 months). Treatment with injection showed a mean improvement of 50% in pain levels at follow-up (mean = 7.5 months). The commonest surgical procedure was arthroscopic excision of the distal clavicle and operative studies averaged 6 months of conservative management and a mean functional outcome of 87.8%.

Conclusion

Studies varied in indication, intervention and quality but it did not provide evidence that both non-operative and operative interventions are effective. There was no significant difference between open or arthroscopic distal clavicle excision (DCE). Participants having between 0.5 and 2 cm of clavicle excised had good outcomes and those requiring concomitant shoulder procedures had similarly good outcomes.

Iatrogenic Excessive Clavicle Resection as a Complication of Arthroscopic Distal Clavicle Excision

Arthroscopic distal clavicle excision (DCE) is a reliable procedure to treat acromioclavicular joint arthritis. Typically, only 1 to 2 cm of distal clavicle should be removed. Resection of too much bone can lead to instability of the joint or lack of support to the shoulder. We describe 2 patients who had excessive clavicular bone removed arthroscopically, leading to irreparable clavicular pain and dysfunction. The 2 female patients, ages 56 and 60 years, presented to our clinic with continued pain after DCE. Both had pain intractable with nonoperative treatment and loss of range of motion of the shoulder. Radiographs revealed a distal clavicle defect of 7.5 cm in 1 patient. The second patient had a 2-cm distal clavicular defect with an adjacent 2-cm clavicle bone fragment between the defect and residual clavicle shaft. Both underwent surgery with subtotal claviculectomy for pain control. During surgery, 1 patient had a subclavian vein requiring vascular repair. After 1 year of follow-up, both patients had reduced but residual pain and restricted range of motion. Only 1 patient could rejoin her preinjury occupation. Neither patient could continue with preinjury recreational sports. Excessive removal of the distal clavicle during DCE can result in continued pain and disability of the shoulder. Methods to visualize the anatomy of the distal clavicle and its articulation to the acromion should be considered when performing this operation arthroscopically. Reoperation to remove subtotal clavicle has good clinical outcomes but may lead to serious complications due to the proximity to major neurovascular structures. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(1):e57-e60.].

Risk factors for failure to achieve minimal clinically important difference and significant clinical benefit in PROMIS computer adaptive test domains in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair

BACKGROUND

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) has emerged as a valid and efficient means of collecting outcomes in patients with rotator cuff tears. The purpose of this study was to establish threshold score changes to determine minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) in PROMIS computer adaptive test (CAT) scores following rotator cuff repair (RCR). Additionally, we sought to identify potential risk factors for failing to achieve MCID and SCB.

METHODS

Patients undergoing arthroscopic RCR were identified over a 24-month period. Only patients who completed both preoperative and postoperative PROMIS CAT assessments were included in this cohort. PROMIS CAT forms for upper extremity physical function (PROMIS-UE), pain interference (PROMIS-PI), and depression (PROMIS-D) were used with a minimum of 1.5-year follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed to determine threshold score changes to determine anchor-based MCID and SCB, as well as risk factors for failure to achieve significant clinical improvement following surgery.

RESULTS

Of 198 eligible patients, 168 (84.8%) were included in analysis. ΔPROMIS-UE values of 5.8 and 9.7 (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.906 and 0.949, respectively) and ΔPROMIS-PI values of -11.4 and -12.9 (AUC = 0.875 and 0.938, respectively) were identified as threshold predictors of MCID and SCB achievement. On average, 81%, 65%, and 55% of patients achieved MCID for PROMIS-UE, PROMIS-PI, and PROMIS-D whereas 71%, 61%, and 38% of patients in the cohort, respectively, achieved SCB. MCID achievement in PROMIS-UE significantly differed according to risk factors, including smoking status (likelihood ratio [LR]: 9.8, P = .037), tear size (LR: 10.4, P < .001), distal clavicle excision (LR: 6.1, P = .005), and prior shoulder surgery (LR: 19.2, P < .001). Factors influencing SCB achievement for PROMIS-UE were smoking status (LR: 9.3, P = .022), tear size (LR: 8.0, P = .039), and prior shoulder surgery (11.9, P < .001). Significantly different rates of MCID and SCB achievement in PROMIS-PI for smoking status (LR: 7.0, P = .030, and LR: 5.2, P = .045) and prior shoulder surgery (LR: 9.1, P = .002, and LR: 7.4, P = .006) were also identified.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The majority of patients showed clinically significant improvements that exceeded the established MCID for PROMIS-UE and PROMIS-PI following RCR. Patients with larger tear sizes, a history of prior shoulder surgery, tobacco users, and those who received concomitant distal clavicle excision were at risk for failing to achieve MCID in PROMIS-UE. Additionally, smokers and patients who underwent prior shoulder surgery demonstrated significantly lower improvements in pain scores following surgery.

Distal Clavicle Excision: An Epidemiologic Study Using the National Ambulatory Surgery Sample Database

Background: This study aimed to examine national trends pertaining to patient demographics and hospital characteristics among distal clavicle excision (DCE) procedures performed in the United States.

Methods: The National Ambulatory Surgery Sample (NASS) database was queried for data. Encounters with Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 29824 were selected. Metrics derived from these encounters included patient demographic information such as age, geographic location, median household income per zip code, and primary expected insurance payer. Hospital characteristics derived included total charges for DCE procedures, location of the hospital, disposition of the patient, hospital census region, control/ownership of the hospital, and location/teaching status of the hospital. The proportion of DCE performed concomitantly with rotator cuff repair (RCR) was also analyzed. P-values were obtained from continuous variables using a t-test with a linear regression model. P-values were obtained from event variables using chi-square analysis.

Results: The incidence of arthroscopic DCE in the US decreased from 99,070 in 2016 to 93,678 (5.5%) in 2018. Of note, the proportion of DCE performed concomitantly with RCR significantly increased from 50.4% in 2016 to 52.8% in 2018 (P < 0.0001). Median patient age increased from 2016 to 2018 (56.4 to 57.2; P < 0.0001). The income quartile that saw the highest number of encounters was between $43,000 and $53,999 (P < 0.0001). Hospital trends display an increasing cost from $16,944 to $18,855 over the study period (P = 0.0016). Private insurance, including health maintenance organizations (HMOs), were the largest payers for this procedure; however, a decreasing trend in DCE covered by private insurance was noticed (50.2% to 47.3%; P < 0.0001). Medicare was the second-largest payer ranging from 27.9% in 2016 to 29.9% in 2018. The urban teaching model of hospitals continues to see the highest number of encounters for this procedure.

Conclusions: In both 2016 and 2018, private insurance was the most common payer, most DCEs were performed in urban teaching hospitals, and most patients undergoing the procedure had a median household income between $43,000 and $59,000. Between 2016 and 2018, there was a significant increase in costs associated with DCE, as well as an increase in the median age of patients undergoing the procedure. The proportion of DCE performed concurrently with RCR also significantly increased during the study period.

Arthroscopic distal clavicle excision is associated with fewer postoperative complications than open

Background

The rate of complications of open compared to arthroscopic distal clavicle excision remain poorly studied. Therefore, the purpose of this investigation was to (1) Identify most recent national trends in the usage of open vs. arthroscopic approaches for distal clavicle excision (DCE) from 2007 to 2017; (2) to identify and compare the complication rates for both approaches, and to identify patient-specific risk factors for complications; (3) to identify and compare the revision rate for both approaches; and (4) to identify and compare the reimbursement of each approach.

Methods

The PearlDiver database was reviewed for patients undergoing DCE from 2007 to 2017. Patients were stratified into 2 cohorts: those undergoing arthroscopic DCE (n = 8933) and those undergoing open DCE (n = 2295). The rate of postoperative complications within 90 days was calculated and compared. The revision rate and reimbursement of the arthroscopic and open approach were compared. Statistical analysis included chi-square testing to compare the rates of postoperative complications and multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify risk factors for complications within 90 days. Results were considered significant at P < .05.

Results

The percentage of DCEs performed arthroscopically has significantly increased from 53.9% in 2007 to 69.8% in 2016, with a concomitant decrease in the use of open DCE from 46.1% in 2007 to 30.2% in 2016. The open approach was associated with significantly more postoperative complications, including a significantly greater incidence of surgical site infection (1.9% vs. 0.3%; P < .001), wound disruption (0.3% vs. 0.1%; P < .001), hematoma (0.9% vs. 0.2%; P = .001), and transfusion (0.6% vs. 0.1%; P < .001), than arthroscopic DCE. Several risk factors, including open approach, diabetes, heart disease, tobacco use, chronic kidney disease, and female gender, were identified as independent risk factors for complications after DCE. There was no significant difference in revision rate between open and arthroscopic approaches (P = .126). The reimbursement of open and arthroscopic DCE procedures were comparable, with median reimbursements of $5408 and $5,447, respectively (P = .853).

Conclusion

Both arthroscopic and open DCE techniques were found to have similar reimbursement amounts, with a low rate of complications, although the open technique had a higher rate of early complications such as surgical site infection. Over the study period, there was an increase in the utilization of arthroscopic DCE, while the incidence of the open technique remained constant.

Acromioclavicular joint arthritis is not an indication for routine distal clavicle excision in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the significance of untreated primary acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) osteoarthritis, encountered during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR), as a cause of persistent symptomatology and need for revision surgery.

METHODS

In a cohort of 811 consecutive patients older than 55 years who underwent RCR, the effect of primary ACJ osteoarthritis presence was prospectively examined. A total of 497 patients with mild/moderate and severe ACJ osteoarthritis based on preoperative MRI evaluation were allocated to Group A (n = 185, symptomatic ACJ) and Group B (n = 312, asymptomatic ACJ). Distal clavicle excision was not performed regardless of the presence of pain. The minimum follow-up was 28 months (28-46). The visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores were assessed for ACJ pain on palpation, the cross body adduction test, the Constant-Murley, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES).

RESULTS

The overall loss to follow-up rate was 3.82% (19 patients: 11 in Group A and eight in Group B). The mean ASES score at the latest follow-up was 91.16 ± 9.3 and 92.37 ± 10.44 in Groups A and B, respectively, and the mean Constant-Murley score was 96.36 ± 5.7 and 95.76 ± 4.6 in Groups A and B, respectively. There was no statistical significance between regarding both scores. Localised ACJ pain on palpation and pain on cross body adduction were diminished in both the symptomatic and asymptomatic group. There were five cases (1%: two in Group A and three in Group B) with persistent ACJ pain who had failed the conservative treatment, and ACJ excision was necessary to alleviate the symptoms. All revision operations were uncomplicated with symptom resolution.

CONCLUSION

Untreated ACJ osteoarthritis, symptomatic or not, encountered during arthroscopic RCR is associated with a low percentage of failure. Routine distal clavicle excision is not absolutely necessary, even in patients with symptomatic ACJ osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II, Prospective cohort study.

Distal Clavicle Excision for Acromioclavicular Joint Osteoarthritis Using a Fluoroscopic Kirschner Wire Guide

Pathology of the acromioclavicular joint is common and often resistant to conservative treatment, requiring distal clavicle excision for definitive relief. First described as an open technique by Mumford and Gurd in 1941, distal clavicle excision has evolved greatly, with arthroscopic techniques currently predominating. No significant difference has been found in patient satisfaction or rate of complication between the techniques in a recent meta-analysis. Indeed, open excisions are still performed at a high rate, owing to the difficulty in technique and visualization with arthroscopic methods. One major critique of arthroscopic distal clavicle excision is difficulty safeguarding against under- and overexcision of the distal clavicle due to the lack of depth perception and visual reference points of the arthroscopic perspective. This Technical Note and accompanying video describe an indirect subacromial arthroscopic distal clavicle excision using a fluoroscopic Kirschner wire guide placed at the proximal border prior to resection to serve as a visual and mechanical reference to overexcision.

Arthroscopic Distal Clavicle Resection Through the Supraspinatus Fossa Portal

Disorders of the acromioclavicular (AC) joint quite often necessitate distal clavicle resection (DCR). Arthroscopic DCR is favored because of it is mini-invasive and convenient to treat concomitant intraarticular or subacromial lesions. In previous reports, arthroscopic DCR was performed through the anterior portal with the patient in beach chair position. However, when the patient is in the lateral decubitus position, it is inconvenient to perform DCR through the anterior portal. Thus, we introduce a special DCR technique through the supraspinatus fossa (SSF) portal. The critical point of this technique is viewing the acromioclavicular joint through the routine posterior portal, creating the SSF portal at the anterior edge of the scapular spine and the same medial-to-lateral level to the AC joint, and enough removal of the posterior edge of the distal clavicle. We believe the introduction of this technique will provide a special technical option when DCR is needed.

Trauma fellowship impact on trends and complications of operatively treated clavicle fractures in recently trained orthopedic surgeons

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether fellowship training affected trends and complications of operative clavicle fracture treatment in newly trained orthopedic surgeons.

METHODS

The American Board of Orthopedic Surgery (ABOS) database was utilized to identify cases of open treatment of clavicle fractures submitted by ABOS Part-II Board Certification candidates. From 2005 to 2017, 3148 candidates performed at least one open clavicle fracture treatment. Overall, 6919 cases were included; 3516 of these had over 6 weeks of follow-up. Candidates were divided by fellowship type into 5 groups: Trauma, Sports Medicine, Hand and Upper Extremity or Shoulder, multiple, and other or no fellowship(s). Group differences were analyzed with ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc analysis. Complications, reoperations, nonunion rates, and readmissions between groups were evaluated with Chi-squared test and logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Case volume during the study period was significantly higher after 2007. Trauma candidates performed significantly more operations for clavicle fracture per candidate while candidates with other or no fellowship(s) performed significantly fewer operations per candidate. Patients treated by Trauma candidates were significantly older, had significantly fewer early surgical complications and significantly more early medical complications. Nonunion rates were not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

Candidates treated clavicle fractures surgically more often in 2007 and beyond. Trauma candidates treated older patients, had fewer early surgical complications, and had more medical complications. Reoperation, readmission and nonunion rates were not significantly different between groups.

The impact of fellowship type on trends and complications following total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthrosis by recently trained board-eligible orthopedic surgeons

BACKGROUND

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with an anatomic or reverse prosthesis is a commonly used and successful treatment option for many degenerative shoulder conditions. There is an increasing trend toward fellowship training and subspecialization in newly trained orthopedic surgeons. The literature also suggests that subspecialization and high volume are associated with better clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of fellowship training on the trends and outcomes of TSA in board-eligible orthopedic surgeons.

METHODS

The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery database was used to identify primary TSA cases performed for osteoarthrosis submitted by American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part II Board Certification candidates. Candidates were grouped based on fellowship training and subspecialty examination being taken. Groups were analyzed with analysis of variance and Bonferroni post hoc analysis to evaluate significant differences between groups for a number of candidates, cases per candidate, and patient age/sex. Differences in complications, reoperations, and readmissions were statistically evaluated with χ² tests and multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2017, 854 candidates performed at least 1 primary TSA (anatomic or reverse) after a diagnosis of osteoarthritis and 2720 submitted cases met inclusion criteria. Candidates completing a Shoulder fellowship performed significantly more TSAs per candidate compared with all other groups (Shoulder = 8.0 ± 6.2, Sports Medicine = 2.4 ± 2.1, Hand and Upper Extremity = 2.9 ± 2.9, General Orthopedics = 2.4 ± 2.3, P < .001). The Shoulder fellowship group had significantly lower complication rates (17.9%) as compared with the Sports Medicine fellowship (23.7%, P = .008) and Hand and Upper Extremity fellowship (25.0%, P = .008) groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Shoulder fellowship-trained surgeons performed significantly more TSAs per year than other groups, with a lower complication rate when compared with other fellowship-trained candidates. Fellowship type had no effect on reoperation or readmission rates.

Trends in open shoulder surgery among early career orthopedic surgeons: who is doing what?

BACKGROUND

The incidence of various open shoulder procedures has changed over time. In addition, various fellowships provide overlapping training in open shoulder surgery. There is a lack of information regarding the relationship between surgeon training and open shoulder procedure type and incidence in early career orthopedic surgeons.

METHODS

The American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery Part-II database was queried from 2002 to 2016 for reported open shoulder procedures. The procedures were categorized as follows: arthroplasty, revision arthroplasty, open instability, trauma, and open rotator cuff. We evaluated procedure trends as well as their relationship to surgeon fellowship categorized by Sports, Shoulder/Elbow, Hand, Trauma, and "Other" fellowship as well as no fellowship training. We additionally evaluated complication data as it related to procedure, fellowship category, and volume.

RESULTS

Over the 2002-2016 study period, there were increasing cases of arthroplasty, revision arthroplasty, and trauma (P < .001). There were decreasing cases in open instability and open rotator cuff (P < .001). Those with Sports training reported the largest overall share of open shoulder cases. Those with Shoulder/Elbow training reported an increasing overall share of arthroplasty cases and higher per candidate case numbers. The percentage of early career orthopedic surgeons reporting 5 or more arthroplasty cases was highest among Shoulder/Elbow candidates (P < .001). Across all procedures, those without fellowship training were least likely to report a complication (odds ratio [OR], 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-0.86; P < .001). Shoulder/Elbow candidates were least likely to report an arthroplasty complication (OR, 0.84, P = .03) as was any surgeon reporting 5 or more arthroplasty cases (OR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.94; P = .006).

CONCLUSION

The type and incidence of open shoulder surgery procedures continues to change. Among early career surgeons, those with more specific shoulder training are now performing the majority of arthroplasty-related procedures, and early career volume inversely correlates with complications.

Preoperative Factors Associated With Subsequent Distal Clavicle Resection After Rotator Cuff Repair

Background:

Acromioclavicular osteoarthritis and rotator cuff tears are commonly coincident.

Purpose:

To determine the rate of subsequent distal clavicle excision (DCE) when rotator cuff repair (RCR) is performed without DCE and the risk factors for subsequent DCE after RCR.

Study Design:

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

The operative logs of 2 surgeons from 2007 to 2016 were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent RCR with or without DCE. Preoperative demographic data, symptoms, physical examination, and standardized outcomes (visual analog scale for pain, Simple Shoulder Test, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score) were noted. Acromioclavicular (AC) arthritis was classified on preoperative radiographs. The rate of subsequent surgery on the AC joint was determined via chart review, and univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to determine risk factors for revision.

Results:

In total, 894 patients underwent isolated RCR, and 46 underwent concomitant RCR and DCE. On retrospective chart review, of those who underwent isolated RCR, the revision rate for any reason was 7.5% (67 patients), and the rate of subsequent AC surgery was 1.1% (10 patients). Preoperatively, 88% of the total cohort was considered to have a radiographically normal AC joint. On multivariate analysis of patients who underwent isolated RCR, the risk factors for subsequent AC surgery included preoperative tenderness to palpation at the AC joint (10% vs 63%, P < .001), female sex (35% vs 80%, P < .001), and surgery on the dominant side (60% vs 100%, P = .002). On multivariate analysis, these 3 factors explained 50% of the variance in revision AC surgery. When these 3 factors were present in combination, there was a 40% rate of revision AC surgery.

Conclusion:

This records review found that 10 of 894 (1.1%) rotator cuff repairs underwent subsequent distal clavicle resection. Risk factors for subsequent DCE included tenderness to palpation at the AC joint, female sex, and surgery on the dominant side, with subsequent DCE performed in 40% of cases with a combination of these 3 factors. Because the duration of follow-up was short and the number of reoperations small, some caution is recommended in interpreting these results, as the analyses may be underpowered.

Editorial Commentary: The "Mumford" & Sons: For Distal Clavicle Excisions, What Are Our Young Surgeons Doing, and How Well Are They Doing It?

The distal clavicle excision (DCE, also known as the "Mumford" procedure), either open or arthroscopic, is a time-honored procedure with generally excellent and predictable results. Surgeons have a choice to make regarding which technique to perform, and most surgeons choose the arthroscopic approach. This choice is justified, as complication rates are lower for arthroscopic DCE than for open DCE. A well-performed arthroscopic DCE should have a very low complication rate and high success rate.