Comparison of hook plate with versus without double-tunnel coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction for repair of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: A prospective randomized controlled clinical trial

Medial placement of trapezoid tunnel leads to higher reduction loss in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation treated with anatomic coracoclavicular fixation

Aim

To analyze the association between clavicular tunnel positioning and postoperative reduction loss in patients with acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation treated with anatomic coracoclavicular (CC) fixation using double clavicular tunnels.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients with AC joint dislocation, treated with anatomic CC fixation using double clavicular tunnels, was conducted. Patients with pre-operative, immediate post-operative, and final follow-up Zanca-view X-rays were included. On each X-ray, the obtained measures included: distance from lateral border of clavicle to trapezoid and conoid tunnels, distance between tunnels, clavicle length, and CC distance of affected and un-affected sides. Loss of reduction was calculated as CC distance difference between immediate and final post-operative X-rays. Association between reduction loss and tunnel positioning was analyzed.

Results

Conoid, trapezoid and tunnel ratios were 24% ± 4, 15% ± 3, and 9% ± 2, respectively. Significant reduction loss was seen in 21(45.7%) patients. Significantly higher probabilities of reduction loss were associated with trapezoid tunnels placed medial to 24 mm (30.8% vs 65.0%, OR 4.2 (IC95%: 1.2-14.4), p: 0.024) or 15% of the clavicle length (32.1% vs 66.7%, OR 4.2 (IC 95%: 1.2-14.9), p: 0.025).

Conclusions

Trapezoid tunnels placed medial to 24 mm or 15% medial to clavicle length could lead to higher probabilities of significant reduction loss. These findings support the importance of clavicular tunnels' proper placement for decreasing significant reduction loss.

Surgical management of acute, high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations: a systematic review

Background

While a number of treatment options exist for repair of acute, high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) separation, none have emerged as the standard of care. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature on surgical treatment of acute, high-grade (Rockwood grades III-V) ACJ separations in order to compare outcomes between direct fixation and tendon graft ligament reconstruction.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature evaluating outcomes for acute ACJ separation treatment with direct fixation or free biologic tendon graft reconstruction was performed. The following databases were examined: the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed (1980-2021), and Embase (1980-2021). Studies were included if they reported a mean time to surgery as <6 weeks, contained >10 patients with a minimum 1-year follow-up, and reported clinical or radiographic outcomes.

Results

A total of 52 studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies reported outcomes following tendon graft ligament reconstruction (n = 128 patients). There were multiple methods of direct fixation. Thirty-three studies utilized suture button constructs (n = 1138), 16 studies used hook plates (n = 567), 2 studies used coracoclavicular screws (n = 94), 2 studies used suture fixation (n = 93), 2 studies used suture anchor (n = 55), 2 studies used suture cerclage fixation (n = 87), 1 used single multistrand titanium cable (n = 24), and 1 used K wire (n = 11). The mean follow-up Constant scores ranged from 77.5 to 97.1 in the fixation group compared to 90.3-96.6 in the tendon graft group. The mean visual analog scale scores ranged from 0 to 4.5 in the fixation group and 0.1-1 in the tendon graft group. Net CC distance ranged from 17.5 to 3.6 mm in the fixation group and 7.4-4 mm in the tendon graft group. The revision rates ranged from 0.0% to 18.18% in the direct fixation group and 5.88%-17% in the tendon graft group.

Conclusion

Direct fixation and tendon graft reconstruction for management of acute, high-grade ACJ separations have similar patient subjective and radiographic outcomes, as well as complication and revision rates at a minimum 1-year follow-up.

Surgical treatments for acute unstable acromioclavicular joint dislocations

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment is usually recommended for acute, high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries. A wide variety of surgical techniques exist, and the literature does not strongly support one over the other. In this literature review, we describe and compare the results of different surgical treatments for the management of acute unstable ACJ dislocation and aim to guide surgeons on optimal treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed by searching PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and Embase databases. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Only studies with comparative data were included. The clinical and radiological outcomes of these studies were reviewed.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included in this literature review. We found no difference in outcomes between open and arthroscopic procedures. Coracoclavicular ligament (CCL) reconstruction techniques provide better results than the more rigid hook plate fixation. There is no evidence that biologic repair with tendon graft is superior to synthetic grafts. Furthermore, an autograft is not shown to be better than an allograft. Rigid fixation between the clavicle and coracoid and the non-anatomic Weaver-Dunn technique appears less popular in recent literature. The hook plate is associated with subacromial osteolysis, acromial erosion, and the morbidity of a secondary procedure.

DISCUSSION

There is a recent increase in publications on the reconstruction of the ACJ after injury, with new techniques focusing on the anatomic reconstruction of the CCLs aiming to restore both vertical and horizontal plane stability of the ACJ using synthetic/biological grafts. Despite the plethora of new techniques introduced, meaningful comparisons are difficult to draw due to the heterogeneity of the treatments used and the outcome measure used to assess the results.

Does coracoclavicular augmentation additional to hook plate fixation provide benefits in acute unstable acromioclavicular dislocation? A meta-analysis

Background

Acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation is a common shoulder injury. In treating acute unstable ACJ dislocation, a hook plate (HP) is a straightforward and popular option for ensuring proper reduction and rigid fixation while promoting AC and coracoclavicular (CC) ligament healing. Surgeons typically remove the HP to prevent subacromial impingement and acromial osteolysis; however, concerns about redislocation after implant removal remain. Therefore, additional CC augmentation may be helpful in combination with HP fixation. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes and complications of HP fixation with or without additional CC augmentation for acute unstable ACJ dislocation.

Methods

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for relevant case–control studies. The primary outcomes were patient-reported outcome measures; the secondary outcomes were pain measured using a visual analog scale (VAS), CC distance (CCD), and complications. Continuous data were assessed using weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and dichotomous data were evaluated with Mantel–Haenszel odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs.

Results

We analyzed one randomized control trial and four case–control studies comparing HP fixation with or without CC augmentation. A total of 474 patients with Rockwood type III or V ACJ dislocation were included. We found no differences in Constant–Murley score (SMD, − 0.58, 95% CI − 1.41 to 0.26; P = 0.18), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (SMD, 0.21, 95% CI − 0.10 to 0.52; P = 0.19), University of California at Los Angeles shoulder rating scale score (SMD, − 0.02, 95% CI − 1.27 to 1.23; P = 0.97), or VAS pain score (SMD, 0.36, 95% CI − 0.16 to 0.88; P = 0.17) between groups. The CC augmentation group had lower odds of osteolysis (OR, 0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.74; P = 0.01) and a shorter CCD (SMD, − 0.29, 95% CI − 0.57 to − 0.01; P = 0.04).

Conclusion

HP fixation with CC augmentation is preferable for acute unstable ACJ dislocations. Although CC augmentation did not provide additional benefits related to functional outcomes or pain, it resulted in greater reduction maintenance after implant removal and a 73% lower risk of acromial osteolysis.

Trial registration

PROSPERO (CRD42021271118).

Efficacy of Transosseous Tunnel Placement for Triple Endobutton Plate in Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction: A Three-Dimensional Printing Guide Design Technology

Objective

Explore an accurate transosseous tunnel drilling method based on three‐dimensional (3D) printing technology for acromioclavicular joint reconstruction (ACD), design a guide design, and evaluate its accuracy.

Methods

Using Mimics software to reconstruct 100 cases of acromioclavicular joint computed tomography (CT) data. In design 2, the non‐collinear tunnel is superimposed on the 3D model, and a virtual drilling is performed between the clavicle and the coracoid using a triple inner gusset. Then, in the Geomagic Studio software model, an elliptical plane is calculated and extracted as a guide design for precise drilling. Then put the design and the 3D shoulder model together for 3D printing. Ten lengths were measured, and the effects of the virtual model, the actual model, and the guide rail design were compared.

Results

We successfully compared 10 parameters of 3D virtual model and actual model. There was no significant difference between actual and virtual bone tunnels in 10 measurements (P > 0.05).

Conclusions

The accuracy of ACD combined with 3D printing guidance design technology in the transosseous tunnel of adult shoulder is reliable.

[Clavicular hook plate with coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor in the treatment of unstable distal clavicle fractures]

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of a clavicular hook plate with coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor in the treatment of Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicle fractures.

Methods

Between January 2010 and June 2016, 16 patients with Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicle fractures were treated with clavicle hook plates and coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor. There were 12 males and 4 females with an average age of 45.6 years (range, 14-81 years). The injury mechanism included falling in 10 cases, traffic accident injury in 2 cases, falling from height in 2 cases, and heavy object injury in 2 cases. The Neer classification of clavicle fractures included 2 cases of type Ⅱa, 13 cases of type Ⅱb, and 1 case of type Ⅴ. The injury severity score (ISS) was 6-29, with an average of 11.2. The time from injury to operation was 1-18 days, with an average of 6.4 days. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospitalization stay, fracture healing, and postoperative complications were recorded; the disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score, the shoulder joint Constant score, and the Oxford shoulder score (OSS) were used to evaluate the shoulder joint at last follow-up.

Results

All operations were successfully completed. The operation time was 50-100 minutes, with an average of 75.6 minutes; intraoperative blood loss was 30-100 mL, with an average of 52.8 mL; hospitalization stay was 4-47 days, with an average of 13.7 days. All patients were followed up 1.2-7.5 years, with an average of 3.5 years. All clavicle fractures healed, and the healing time was 9.4-13.6 weeks, with an average of 11.9 weeks. No fracture nonunion, fracture displacement, failure of internal fixation, or incision infection, etc. occurred. Fifteen patients took out the hook plate after fracture healing and functional recovery, and 1 case refused to remove the hook plate from the second operation because of no obvious discomfort. At last follow-up, the DASH score was 0-13, with an average of 2.2; the shoulder joint Constant score was 90-100, with an average of 96.8; the OSS score was 12-14, with an average of 12.3.

Conclusion

Clavicular hook plate with coracoclavicular ligament augmentation by suture anchor can help achieve good effectiveness with less postoperative complication in the treatment of Neer types Ⅱ and Ⅴ distal clavicular fractures.

Biologic and synthetic ligament reconstructions achieve better functional scores compared to osteosynthesis in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation

PURPOSE

To systematically review the outcomes of surgical treatments of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

METHODS

Studies were identified by electronic databases (Ovid, PubMed). All studies reporting functional and radiological outcomes of surgical treatments of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations were included. Following data were extracted: authors and year, study design, level of evidence, number of patients, age, classification of acromioclavicular joint dislocation, time to surgery, surgical technique, follow-up, clinical and imaging outcomes, complications, and failures. Descriptive statistics was used, when a data pooling was not possible. Comparable outcomes were pooled to generate summary outcomes reported as frequency-weighted values. Quality appraisal was assessed through the MINORS checklist.

RESULTS

One hundred and thirty-three studies were included for a total of 4473 shoulders. Mean age of participants was 36.9 years. Mean follow-up was 42.06 months. Arthroscopy showed better ASES (p < 0.0001) and lower VAS pain score (p = 0.0249) compared to an open approach. Biologic and synthetic reconstructions demonstrated better results over osteosynthesis techniques. Biologic techniques showed overall better Constant (p = 0.0001) and DASH (p = 0.0215) scores, while synthetic reconstruction showed better UCLA score (p = 0.0001). Among suture buttons, triple button showed overall better results in Constant (p = 0.0001) and VAS (p = 0.0001) scores, while better results in DASH score (p = 0.0003) were achieved by 2 double button techniques. Overall, the level of evidence was low.

CONCLUSION

Biological and synthetic reconstructions achieved better functional scores compared to osteosynthesis. Among suture buttons, the triple button showed better functional performance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Clinical outcomes of arthroscopic and navigation-assisted two tunnel technique for coracoclavicular ligament augmentation of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations

Background

The purpose of this study was to present a navigated image-free augmentation technique for the acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) and coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments and to report the clinical and radiological outcomes.

Methods

From 2013 to 2018, 35 eligible patients were treated with our navigated image-free ACJ- and CC-augmentation technique. The average follow-up was 3 years. Follow-up evaluations included the Constant-Murley Score, subjective shoulder value, Taft score, and the acromioclavicular joint instability (ACJI) score. The patients’ quality of life was assessed using the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaire. In addition, in accordance with the instability criteria, radiographs were evaluated before surgery, after surgery, and during follow-up.

Results

Overall, 25 patients (71%) suffered an acute type V disruption, 5 (14%) had a type IV disruption, and 5 (14%) had an acute Rockwood type IIIb injury. The mean Constant-Murley Score was 90 (range: 56–100; p = 0.53) on the injured side, and the mean subjective shoulder value was 92% (range: 80–100%). The mean Taft and ACJI scores were 10 (range: 4–12) and 86 (range: 34–100), respectively and the mean EQ-5D was 86 (range: 2–100). The mean CC difference of the injured side was 4 mm (range: 1.9–9.1 mm) at follow-up, which was not significantly different than that of the healthy side (p = 0.06). No fractures in the area of the clavicle or the coracoid were reported.

Conclusions

The arthroscopic- and navigation-assisted treatment of high-grade ACJ injuries in an anatomical double-tunnel configuration yields similar clinical and radiological outcomes as the conventional technique using an aiming device. Precise positioning of the navigation system prevents multiple drillings, which avoids fractures.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04406-2.

Comparison of Hook Plate Fixation Versus Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Fixation Using Multiple Soft Anchor Knots for the Treatment of Acute High-Grade Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of arthroscopically assisted coracoclavicular (CC) fixation using multiple soft anchor knots versus hook plate fixation in patients with acute high-grade Rockwood type III and V acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocations.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 22 patients with acute Rockwood type III and V AC joint dislocations who underwent arthroscopic fixation or hook plate fixation surgery between February 2016 and March 2018. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: arthroscopically assisted CC fixation using multiple soft anchor knots group (AR, n = 12) and hook plate fixation group (HO, n = 10). We measured the CC distances (CCDs) and CCD ratio at 6 months, 1 year, and last follow-up postoperatively to compare the radiologic results between the groups. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 1 year postoperatively and at the last follow-up using the Visual Analog Scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores, and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Magnetic resonance imaging after hook plate removal was used to evaluate the healing ligaments and tendon-bone interface.

RESULTS

The patients in the AR group had better ASES, SPADI, and Quick DASH scores than the patients in the HO group at 1 year postoperatively and at last follow-up. The CCD and CCD ratio were significantly better in the AR group than in the HO group at the last follow-up period (P = .007/0.029). Magnetic resonance imaging findings showed grade I in 60% of patients in the AR group and grade III in 60% of patients in the HO group. AC joint arthritic change was observed in 40% of the HO group.

CONCLUSIONS

The CC fixation method using multiple soft anchor knots showed satisfactory results and had superior CC ligament healing ability and maintenance of CCD than hook fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective therapeutic comparative investigation.

Nonanatomic and Suture-Based Coracoclavicular Joint Stabilization Techniques Provide Adequate Stability at a Lower Cost of Implants in Biomechanical Studies When Compared With Anatomic Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To compare the stability and cost of the used implants in nonanatomic and anatomic acromioclavicular joint repair/reconstruction (ACCR) techniques tested in cadaveric shoulder biomechanical studies during the last decade.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and prospectively registered in PROSPERO. Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Embase, and Virtual Health Library databases. Studies evaluating 3-direction stability under 70-N loads and load-to-failure protocols with servohydraulic testing systems were included. A meta-analysis of the mean differences of anterior, posterior, and superior direction; relative stability value in 3 directions; superior direction load-to-failure; stability/cost index; and load-to-failure/cost index was performed using a continuous random-effects model and 95% confidence interval.

Results

Eighteen articles were included. Both non-ACCR and ACCR techniques exceeded the minimum acceptable threshold of stability and load-to-failure. ACCR techniques were biomechanically better in terms of anterior stability (P = .04) and relative stability value (mean difference 64.08%, P = .015). However, supraphysiological stability and failure loads were achieved with non-ACCR techniques at a lower cost of implants. Techniques combining 2 clavicular tunnels separated by at least 10 mm, a mean of 2 sutures, and/or suture tapes had the greatest stability/cost index and load-to-failure/cost index among the included techniques (confidence interval 99%).

Conclusions

Non-ACCR and ACCR techniques exceeded the minimum acceptable threshold of stability and failure loads in controlled biomechanical testing. However, non-ACCR and techniques combining 2 clavicular tunnels separated by at least 10 mm, a mean of 2 sutures, and/or suture tapes provide supraphysiologic stability and failure loads at a lower cost of implants.

Clinical Relevance

Non-ACCR and suture-based techniques may provide more cost-effective and greater value treatment for acromioclavicular joint injury and could be considered in the surgical management of normal activity individuals and cost-sensitive populations.

Is coracoclavicular reconstruction necessary in hook plate fixation for acute unstable acromioclavicular dislocation?

Background

Acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation is a relatively common shoulder injury. For the treatment of cases of severe ACJ dislocation (Rockwood type III–V), hook plate fixation is an easy-to-master and minimally-invasive approach to surgical intervention. Over stress on the acromion following hook plate fixation often leads to acromial complications such as osteolysis and loss of reduction. We hypothesized that suspensory reconstruction alongside hook plate fixation might provide a superior stability and reduce complications as compared with hook plate fixation alone. The purpose of the study was to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of these two surgical modalities.

Methods

We retrospectively enrolled 49 patients with acute ACJ dislocation from May 2010 to December 2018. Among them, 19 patients received hook plate fixation only (HP group), and 19 underwent concomitant hook plate fixation and loop suspension fixation with two mersilene sutures (HM group). The demographic data of the patients were recorded and analyzed. All patients underwent a shoulder X-ray initially, immediately postoperatively, and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months to measure the relative coracoclavicular distance (rCCD). Clinical assessment of shoulder function outcome was conducted using the Constant Murley Score (CMS); the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Score was also measured at the latest follow-up.

Results

There were no significant differences in the demographic data between the two groups. With regards to the CMS and the UCLA score, the HM group and HP group both had excellent outcomes, and no significant differences in scores were observed between groups (CMS: 93.90 ± 6.16 versus 94.47 ± 7.26, p = 0.47; UCLA score: 32.84 ± 2.91 versus 34.32 ± 1.16, p = 0.07). However, the HM group demonstrated substantial superiority in terms of maintenance of the rCCD over the HP group (91.47 ± 27.47 versus 100.75 ± 48.70, p = 0.015). In addition, there was less subacromial osteolysis in the HM group than the HP group (52.6% versus 15.8%, p = 0.038).

Conclusion

Both fixations yielded excellent functional outcomes. However, concomitant hook plate fixation with loop suspensory reconstruction demonstrated the fewer acromion complications and statistical differences in reduction maintenance with less clinical significance.

High degree of consensus achieved regarding diagnosis and treatment of acromioclavicular joint instability among ESA-ESSKA members

PURPOSE

To develop a consensus on diagnosis and treatment of acromioclavicular joint instability.

METHODS

A consensus process following the modified Delphi technique was conducted. Panel members were selected among the European Shoulder Associates of ESSKA. Five rounds were performed between October 2018 and November 2019. The first round consisted of gathering questions which were then divided into blocks referring to imaging, classifications, surgical approach for acute and chronic cases, conservative treatment. Subsequent rounds consisted of condensation by means of an online questionnaire. Consensus was achieved when ≥ 66.7% of the participants agreed on one answer. Descriptive statistic was used to summarize the data.

RESULTS

A consensus was reached on the following topics. Imaging: a true anteroposterior or a bilateral Zanca view are sufficient for diagnosis. 93% of the panel agreed on clinical override testing during body cross test to identify horizontal instability. The Rockwood classification, as modified by the ISAKOS statement, was deemed valid. The separation line between acute and chronic cases was set at 3 weeks. The panel agreed on arthroscopically assisted anatomic reconstruction using a suspensory device (86.2%), with no need of a biological augmentation (82.8%) in acute injuries, whereas biological reconstruction of coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments with tendon graft was suggested in chronic cases. Conservative approach and postoperative care were found similar CONCLUSION: A consensus was found on the main topics of controversy in the management of acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Each step of the diagnostic treatment algorithm was fully investigated and clarified.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.

Treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint dislocation

Acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocations account for about 9% of shoulder injuries. Among them, acute high-grade injury following high-energy trauma accounts for a large proportion of patients requiring surgical treatment. However, there is no gold standard procedure for operative treatment of acute high-grade AC joint injury, and several different procedures have been used for this purpose in clinical practice. This review article summarizes the most recent and relevant surgical options for acute high-grade AC joint dislocation patients and the outcomes of each treatment type.

Surgical techniques for management of acromioclavicular joint separations: review and update for radiologists

Imaging plays a central role in the postoperative management of acromioclavicular (AC) joint separations. There are more than 150 described techniques for the surgical management of AC joint injuries. These procedures can be categorized as varying combinations of the following basic techniques: a) soft-tissue repair, b) trans-articular AC joint fixation, c) coracoclavicular (CC) fixation, d) non-anatomic reconstruction of the CC ligaments, e) anatomic reconstruction of the CC ligaments, f) distal clavicle resection, and g) dynamic muscle transfer. The goals of this article are to describe the basic techniques for the surgical management of AC joint separations with an emphasis on technique-specific complications and postoperative imaging assessment.

Modified Weaver-Dunn Procedure for Type 3 Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: Functional and Radiological Outcomes

Background

Controversy surrounds the indication for treatment of type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, and the optimal reconstructive technique has not yet been defined. Since the first description of the Weaver-Dunn procedure, several studies have described the clinical and radiological results that can be expected postoperatively; however, few studies have evaluated the outcomes of this technique for chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the functional and radiographic mid- to long-term outcomes of a modified Weaver-Dunn procedure for chronic Rockwood type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation. We hypothesized that (1) functional outcomes comparable with sex- and age-matched healthy individuals could be achieved with the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure and (2) joint stability could be restored after surgery.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

Out of 30 patients who sustained a chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, 27 had a minimum 12-month follow-up and were included in the study. All patients underwent a modified Weaver-Dunn procedure. The Constant-Murley score was used to assess patient postoperative function. Subjective evaluation of patient satisfaction with surgery was also recorded. Radiological assessment was performed postoperatively to evaluate superoinferior and anteroposterior joint stability.

Results

After a mean follow-up period of 51.6 months, the mean Constant-Murley score was 90.1, which was 97.2% that of a group of sex- and age-matched healthy individuals. In the multivariate analysis, higher Constant-Murley score was associated with male sex (β = 0.385; P = .043) and higher subjective satisfaction scale (β = 0.528; P = .003). All patients returned to their previous work and sport activity levels having high satisfaction with surgery. Successful vertical acromioclavicular joint reduction was obtained in all but 1 patient; however, horizontal joint stability was not completely restored with the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure. No intraoperative complications occurred, and the postoperative complication rate was 7.4%.

Conclusion

In patients with chronic type 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocation, the modified Weaver-Dunn procedure is an effective technique to restore vertical but not horizontal joint stability 4 years after surgery. High levels of satisfaction with surgery and functional outcomes comparable with sex- and age-matched healthy individuals can be achieved.

Minimally Invasive AC Joint Reconstruction System (MINAR®) in Modified Triple-Button Technique for the Treatment of Acute AC Joint Dislocation

Acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation is a frequent sports injury with more than 100 different operation methods described. A total of 65 patients with an acute AC joint dislocation were treated with the modified MINAR^® system between 2009 and 2013. Clinical outcome, horizontal and vertical instability, as well as concomitant intraarticular injuries were assessed. We used Zanca, stress and axial X-rays for radiological assessment. A Constant score of 95 (±8.8), University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score (UCLA) of 31 (±4.9), Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) of 9.1 (±14.3), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of 0.9 (±0.126) was found. A total of 30 patients (59%) had no signs of reduction loss, nine patients (18%) a slight loss, 11 patients (22%) a partial loss, and one patient (2%) a total loss. No significant influence on the clinical scores could be shown. The postoperative coracoclavicular (CC) distance negatively affected the Constant (p = 0.007) and UCLA scores (p = 0.035). A longer time interval to surgery had a negative influence on all scores (p ≤ 0.001). We could not find any signs of persistent horizontal instability or intraarticular injuries at follow-up. The MINAR^® system promises satisfactory functional and radiological results. When setting the correct indication, patients benefit from an early operation. No persisting horizontal instability was observed following suturing of the AC capsule and the delta fascia.

Surgical versus conservative interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocation of the shoulder in adults

BACKGROUND

Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is one of the most common shoulder injuries in a sport-active population. The question of whether surgery should be used remains controversial. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of surgical versus conservative (non-surgical) interventions for treating acromioclavicular dislocations in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (to June 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2019, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1946 to June 2019), Embase (1980 to June 2019), and LILACS (1982 to June 2019), trial registries, and reference lists of articles. There were no restrictions based on language or publication status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials that compared surgical with conservative treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently performed study screening and selection, 'Risk of bias' assessment, and data extraction. We pooled data where appropriate and used GRADE to assess the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised trials and one quasi-randomised trial. The included trials involved 357 mainly young adults, the majority of whom were male, with acute acromioclavicular dislocation. The strength of the findings in all studies was limited due to design features, invariably lack of blinding, that carry a high risk of bias. Fixation of the acromioclavicular joint using hook plates, tunnelled suspension devices, coracoclavicular screws, acromioclavicular pins, or (usually threaded) wires was compared with supporting the arm in a sling or similar device. After surgery, the arm was also supported in a sling or similar device in all trials. Where described in the trials, both groups had exercise-based rehabilitation. We downgraded the evidence for all outcomes at least two levels, invariably for serious risk of bias and serious imprecision.Low-quality evidence from two studies showed no evidence of a difference between groups in shoulder function at one year, assessed using the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH) (0 (best function) to 100 (worst function)): mean difference (MD) 0.73 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.70 to 4.16; 112 participants. These results were consistent with other measures of function at one-year or longer follow-up, including non-validated outcome scores reported by three studies. There is low-quality evidence that function at six weeks may be better after conservative treatment, indicating an earlier recovery. Very low-quality evidence from one trial found no difference between groups in participants reporting pain at one year: risk ratio (RR) 1.32, 95% CI 0.54 to 3.19; 79 participants. There is very low-quality evidence that surgery may not reduce the risk of treatment failure, usually resulting in non-routine secondary surgery: 14/168 versus 15/174; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.94; 342 participants, 6 studies. The main source of treatment failure was complications related to surgical implants in the surgery group and persistent symptoms, mainly discomfort, due to the acromioclavicular dislocation in the conservatively treated group.There is low-quality evidence from two studies that there may be little or no difference between groups in the return to former activities (sports or work) at one year: 57/67 versus 62/70; RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10; 137 participants, 2 studies. Low-quality but consistent evidence from four studies indicated an earlier recovery in conservatively treated participants compared with those treated with surgery. There is low-quality evidence of no clinically important difference between groups at one year in quality of life scores, measured using the 36-item or 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36 or SF-12) (0-to-100 scale, where 100 is best score), in either the physical component (MD -0.63, 95% CI -2.63 to 1.37; 122 participants, 2 studies) or mental component (MD 0.47 points, 95% CI -1.51 to 2.44; 122 participants). There is very low-quality and clinically heterogenous evidence of a greater risk of an adverse event after surgery: 45/168 versus 16/174; RR 2.82, 95% CI 1.65 to 4.82; 342 participants, 6 studies; I² = 48%. Common adverse outcomes were hardware complications or discomfort (18.5%) and infection (8.7%) in the surgery group and persistent symptoms (7.1%), mainly discomfort, in the conservatively treated group. The majority of surgical complications occurred in older studies testing now-outdated devices known for their high risk of complications. The very low-quality evidence from one study (70 participants) means that we are uncertain whether there is a between-group difference in patient dissatisfaction with cosmetic results.It is notable that the evidence for function, return to former activities, and quality of life came from the two most recently conducted studies, which tested currently used devices and interventions in clearly defined participant populations that represented the commonly perceived population for which there is uncertainty over the use of surgery. There were insufficient data to conduct subgroup analysis relating to type of injury and whether surgery involved ligament reconstruction or not.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is low-quality evidence that surgical treatment has no additional benefits in terms of function, return to former activities, and quality of life at one year compared with conservative treatment. There is, however, low-quality evidence that people treated conservatively had improved function at six weeks compared with surgical management. There is very low-quality evidence of little difference between the two treatments in pain at one year, treatment failure usually resulting in secondary surgery, or patient satisfaction with cosmetic result. Although surgery may result in more people sustaining adverse events, this varied between the trials, being more common in techniques such as K-wire fixation that are rarely used today. There remains a need to consider the balance of risks between the individual outcomes: for example, surgical adverse events, including wound infection or dehiscence and hardware complication, against risk of adverse events that may be more commonly associated with conservative treatment such as persistent symptoms or discomfort, or both.There is a need for sufficiently powered, good-quality, well-reported randomised trials of currently used surgical interventions versus conservative treatment for well-defined injuries.

Different treatment strategies for acromioclavicular dislocation injuries: a nationwide survey on open/minimally invasive and arthroscopic concepts

Background

Injuries to the acromioclavicular (AC) joint are one of the most common among sporting injuries of the upper extremity. Several studies investigated different treatment options comparing surgical and non-surgical treatment, and type of operative interventions. This study aims to evaluate treatment decisions regarding injuries of the AC joint and to compare different treatment strategies depending on the specific training of the treating physician.

Methods

We performed a nationwide survey by contacting different experienced physicians and sending them questionnaires. The questionnaire included 37 questions that assessed preferred treatment strategies in AC joint injuries. We addressed different surgical and nonsurgical options as well as level of experience and factors that might influence the decision on treatment strategy. The physicians were stratified according to their training into general surgeons (group trauma associated) and orthopedic surgeons (orthopedic associated). The AC joint lesions were categorized according to the widely used Rockwood classification.

Results

This study analyses 96 questionnaires. We included 46 (47.9%) colleagues in group trauma and 50 (52.1%) in group orthopedics. Most of the colleagues (98.9%) prefer non-operative treatment of type I and type II AC lesions. Similarly, 96.8% agree on surgical treatment of types IV, V, and VI lesions. The treatment of type III lesions is performed in 41.6% of cases non-operatively and in 58.4% of cases surgically. Trauma-associated colleagues are 3.4 times more likely to treat AC lesions with a hook plate compared to orthopedic-associated colleagues (p = 0.05). In decreasing order, the most commonly used non-surgical technique is sling immobilization (63.7%), and the most commonly performed surgical treatment is the hook plate (41.1%) in treating type III injuries.

Conclusion

This study shows a distinct difference in treatment of AC joint injuries depending on the training of the physician. Further, the need for high-quality studies arises to define the optimal treatment of type III lesions.