Coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction with a double-bundle semitendinosus autograft and cortical buttons for chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocations: clinical and imaging outcomes

BACKGROUND

There are few clinical and radiographic studies of coracoclavicular (CC) ligament reconstruction in chronic acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation. Additionally, reported AC joint reduction rates vary.

HYPOTHESIS

Arthroscopically assisted double-bundle semitendinosus tendon autografts with CC and AC ligament reconstruction for AC joint reconstruction provide AC joint stability and improved function at the final visit.

METHODS

In this retrospective study of prospectively collected data, 21 patients surgically treated for chronic AC joint dislocation (Rockwood III-V) were assessed clinically and radiographically preoperatively, and at day 1, 3 months, 12 months, and at a final visit (> 24 months) postoperatively. Clinical assessments included Constant and ASES scores. The CC vertical distance (CCD) on the affected and unaffected sides [CCD ratio (%)] on the anterosuperior view were measured. AC joint vertical reduction loss was defined as an increase in the CCD ratio of > 25%. Horizontal AC joint instability was evaluated on axillary views. Pearsons' correlation coefficients were generated to examine the relationships among postoperative clinical scores, CCD ratio, interval from injury to surgery, and age at the time of surgery.

RESULTS

Twenty-one shoulders in 21 patients (mean age, 40.0 years at the time of surgery; 16 men, 5 women) were evaluated with a mean 31.7-month follow-up period. The mean Constant scores, ASES scores, and CCD ratios significantly improved from preoperatively to the final visit [57.4 ± 10.1, 49.1 ± 12.1, 101.6 ± 64.1 preoperatively; 89.6 ± 5.3, 96.5 ± 4.2, 9.9 ± 34.5 at the final visit, respectively (P < 0.001 for all)]. Vertical AC and horizontal AC joint instability were observed in four shoulders (19.0%) and in one shoulder (4.8%), respectively. However, there was no significant correlation between the increase in CCD and clinical scores at the final visit (Constant score; r = 0.179, P = .438: ASES score; r = -0.260, P = .256) or the interval from injury to surgery (r = 0.099, P = .669) or age at the time of surgery (r = 0.019, P = .935). No clinical complications were associated with clinical symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent the index procedure achieved significant improvement in shoulder function without complications related clinical symptom after a mean follow-up interval of 31.7 months. In contrast, the rates of total ACJ instability in the vertical and horizontal planes were unsatisfactory but compatible with those in previous studies.

Retrospective Study on the Risk of Nerve Injury After Distal Biceps Tendon Repair Using Cortical Button

BACKGROUND

Distal biceps tendon ruptures are relatively rare injuries that typically require surgical intervention to restore flexion and supination strength. Concerns have been raised regarding the risk of nerve injuries, particularly the posterior interosseous nerve (PIN), associated with the use of cortical buttons in distal biceps repair. This study aimed to estimate the incidence of PIN injury as well as injuries to the lateral cutaneous nerve of the forearm and superficial branch of the radial nerve following distal biceps repair using cortical buttons.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on all patients who underwent distal biceps repair with cortical buttons at a district general hospital between January 2014 and May 2022. Patient data, including age, gender, time from injury to surgery, type of procedure, and postoperative nerve injuries, were collected. The incidence of nerve injuries was analyzed, and the outcomes were assessed during postoperative follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Ninety-six male patients were included in the study, with an average age of 45.6 years. The average time from injury to surgery was 22.6 days. All patients underwent primary repair except for two patients who underwent reconstruction with hamstring grafts. None of the patients experienced a PIN injury. However, 16 patients (16.7%) developed lateral cutaneous nerve injuries of the forearm, and three patients (3.1%) had superficial radial nerve injuries.

CONCLUSION

Our study, encompassing a large cohort of patients over an eight-year period, demonstrates the safety of distal biceps repair using cortical buttons with regard to PIN nerve injury. However, there were incidences of lateral cutaneous nerve of the forearm and superficial radial nerve injuries, consistent with previous studies.

Arthroscopic Latarjet: 2 or 4 Cortical Buttons for Coracoid Fixation? A Case-Control Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

While 2 screws are traditionally used for coracoid bone block fixation, no gold standard technique has yet been established when using cortical buttons.

PURPOSE

To compare anatomic and clinical outcomes of the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure using either 2 or 4 buttons for coracoid bone block fixation.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 23 patients with 4-button fixation (group 4B) were matched for age at surgery, sex, and follow-up to 46 patients who had 2-button fixation (group 2B). All patients underwent guided arthroscopic Latarjet (using coracoid and glenoid guides), and a tensioning device was used to rigidify the suture button construct and get intraoperative bone block compression. The primary outcome was assessment of bone block positioning and healing using computed tomography scans performed at 2 weeks and at least 6 months after surgery. The mean ± standard deviation follow-up was 49 ± 7 months (range, 24-64 months).

RESULTS

The bone block healing rate was similar in both groups: 91% in group 4B versus 95.5% in group 2B. The transferred coracoid was flush to the glenoid surface in 21 patients (91%) in group 4B and 44 patients (96%) in group 2B (P = .6); it was under the equator in 22 patients (96%) in group 4B and 44 patients (96%) in group 2B (P≥ .99). There was no secondary bone block displacement; the rate of bone block resorption was similar between the groups: 28% in group 4B and 23% in group 2B (P = .71). Patient-reported outcomes, return to sports, and satisfaction were also similar between the groups. The operating time was significantly longer in group 4B (95 vs 75 minutes; P = .009).

CONCLUSION

A 4-button fixation technique did not demonstrate any anatomic or clinical advantages when compared with a 2-button fixation technique, while making the procedure more complex and lengthening the operating time by 20 minutes. A 2-button fixation is simple, safe, and sufficient to solidly fix the transferred coracoid bone block. The use of drill guides allows accurate graft placement, while the use of a tensioning device to rigidify the suture button construct provides high rates of bone block healing with both techniques (>90%).

Pectoralis Major Repair: A Biomechanical Analysis of Modern Repair Configurations Versus Traditional Repair Configuration

BACKGROUND

Pectoralis major (PM) ruptures are increasingly common, and a variety of surgical techniques have been described. However, tested techniques have demonstrated diminished strength with inadequate restoration of the footprint and suture failure at relatively low loads. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to biomechanically compare PM transosseous suture repair (current gold standard) to modern PM repair techniques that use larger caliber sutures, suture tape, and unicortical button fixation (UBF). The null hypothesis was that there would be no mechanical difference between repair techniques and no difference in the amount of footprint restoration.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Twenty-four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders controlled for age and bone mineral density were randomized equally to 4 groups: (1) UBF, suture tape; (2) UBF, No. 5 suture, suture tape; (3) bone trough with No. 2 suture; and (4) native PM tendon group; all groups were tested to failure. The specimens were tested under cycling loads (10 N to 125 N) with a final load-to-failure test at 1 mm/s. Failure modes were classified by location and cause of rupture based on optical markers, while tendon footprint length was measured to determine amount of footprint restoration.

RESULTS

For fixation strength, the mean peak load was significantly greater in the native tendon (1816 ± 706 N) versus UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape (794 ± 168 N), UBF/suture tape (502 ± 201 N), and bone trough (492 ± 151 N) ( P < .001 for all). UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape featured the lowest displacement superiorly (1.09 ± 0.47 mm) and inferiorly (1.14 ± 0.39 mm) with a significant difference compared with bone trough. With regard to tendon footprint reapproximation, cortical button fixation best approximated native tendon footprint length versus bone trough.

CONCLUSION

Based on peak failure load, the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct demonstrated 61% greater construct strength than a traditional bone trough technique. Moreover, displacement after cyclic loading was by far smallest in the UBF/No. 5 suture/suture tape construct. Therefore, repair constructs with larger caliber suture and suture tape provide a measurable improvement in construct strength versus traditional PM repair techniques in a biomechanical model and may be advantageous for repair.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Cortical button fixation with larger caliber suture and suture tape allows for a significantly better PM repair than more traditional techniques at the time of surgery, which may ultimately result in improved clinical outcomes if implemented in surgical practice.