Acromioclavicular Joint Separation: Repair Through Suture Anchors for Coracoclavicular Ligament and Nonabsorbable Suture Fixation for Acromioclavicular Joint

An In Vitro Study Demonstrating the Significance of Acromioclavicular Ligament Repair in Restoring Horizontal and Rotational Acromioclavicular Joint Stability

BACKGROUND

The principle of joint reconstruction surgery is to try to recreate the native joint biomechanics and stability. With respect to acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) surgery, much focus to date has been on restoring the superoinferior stability. There is concern that persistent horizontal instability following ACJ reconstruction could lead to poorer patient outcomes; therefore, we evaluated whether acromioclavicular (AC) ligament repair offers improved horizontal stability in conjunction with ACJ reconstruction.

METHODS

A whole-body human cadaver was used. The ACJ was exposed and subjected to a constant 70N load on the lateral end of the clavicle to test the anteroposterior (AP), superoinferior (SI), and horizontal pivot angle (HPA) around the ACJ. The AC and coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments were subsequently divided, and the above three parameters were re-tested. Ligament augmentation and reconstruction system (Corin Group, Cirencester, UK), LockDown (LockDown Medical Limited, Redditch, UK), Endobutton (Smith and Nephew Inc., London, UK), and Neoligament implant (Xiros Ltd., Leeds, UK) were used to reconstruct the CC ligaments and tested with and without AC repair.

RESULTS

The native ACJ allowed an average 2.48 mm AP and 3.88 mm SI translation with a 27° HPA. All synthetic implants significantly improved the vertical stability of the ACJ but allowed up to a four-fold increase in AP translation. Coupled with ACJ repair, all the reconstructions were far superior, especially in restoring horizontal stability.

CONCLUSION

The implants varied in their approach to fixation and concentrated primarily on the reconstruction of CC ligaments. Our study was able to demonstrate that AC repair significantly improves the stability of the construct and significantly reduces vertical and horizontal instability.

Comparison of Effectiveness and Safety in Treating Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation with Five Different Surgical Procedures: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

This network meta-analysis aims to evaluate the comparative effectiveness and safety of suture anchors (SA), tendon grafts (TG), hook plates (HP), Tight-Rope (TR), and EndoButton (EB) in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation. The Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception date to June 3, 2022. Studies included all eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies with the comparison of five different fixation systems among SA, TG, HP, TR, and EB were identified. All studies were reviewed, performed data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias independently by two reviewers. The primary outcomes are Constant-Murley score (CMS) improvement for assessing clinical efficacy, and complications. The second outcomes are visual analog scale (VAS) for assessing pain relief and the coracoclavicular distance (CCD) for assessing postoperative joint reduction. Version 2 of the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) were used to assess the RCTs and non-randomized trials, respectively. The continuous outcomes were presented as mean differences (MD), and risk ratios (OR) were used for dichotomous outcomes, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) results were calculated to offer a ranking of each intervention. We identified 31 eligible trials, including 1687 patients in total. HP showed less CMS improvement than TR and EB in both the Network Meta-analysis (NMA) and pairwise meta-analysis. HP also showed less CMS improvement than SA in NMA. For pain relief, HP performed worse than TR both in pairwise meta-analysis and NMA. No significant differences were found for the measured value of CCD. Both TR and EB showed a lower incidence of complications than HP in pairwise meta-analysis. The rank of SUCRA for CMS improvement was as follows: SA, TR, EB, TG, and HP; for pain relief: TR, EB, TG, SA, and HP; for CCD: HP, TR, SA, EB, and TG. For complications, HP showed the highest rank, followed by TG, EB, TR, and SA. SA shows better clinical effectiveness and reliable safety in the treatment of acute ACJ dislocation. Although HP is the most widely used surgical option currently, it should be carefully taken into consideration for its high incidence of complications.

Horizontal instability after acromioclavicular joint reduction using the two-hole technique is preferred over the loop technique: a single-blind randomized clinical trial

Background

Most acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries are caused by direct trauma to the shoulders, and various methods and techniques are used to treat them; however, none of the options can be considered the gold standard. This study examines the horizontal stability of the ACJ after a complete dislocation was repaired using one of two Ethibond suture techniques, the loop technique and the two holes in the clavicle technique.

Methods

In this single-blind, randomized clinical trial, 104 patients diagnosed with complete ACJ dislocation type V were treated using Ethibond sutures with either the loop technique or the two holes in the clavicle technique. Horizontal changes in the ACJ were radiographically assessed in the lateral axial view, and shoulder function was evaluated by the Constant (CS) and Taft (TS) scores at intervals of 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

Results

The horizontal stability of the ACJ was better with the two-hole technique than the loop technique at all measurement times. CS and TS changes showed a significant upward trend over time with both techniques. The mean CS and TS at the final visit were 95.2 and 11.6 with the loop technique and 94.0 and 11.9 with the two-hole technique, respectively. The incidence of superficial infections caused by the subcutaneous pins was the same in the two groups.

Conclusions

Due to the improved ACJ stability with the two-hole technique, it appears to be a more suitable option than the loop technique for AC joint reduction.

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).