Ligamentous and capsular restraints to anterior-posterior and superior-inferior laxity of the acromioclavicular joint: a biomechanical study

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.

Subject-specific computational modeling of acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular ligaments

BACKGROUND

Disruption of the acromioclavicular joint is a common injury. Despite the different surgical procedures described for treating this injury, complications such as loss of reduction and failure of fixation remain unacceptably high. We developed a computer model of the acromioclavicular joint to better understand the biomechanical contributions of the ligaments that are typically injured.

METHODS

Six fresh frozen human cadaveric shoulders were tested on an AMTI VIVO 6-degree of freedom test platform to measure force-displacement in inferior translation, anteroposterior translation, and internal rotation before and after sequentially transecting the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments. These data were used to construct computer models of each specimen. Three-dimensional computed tomographic scans were used to generate a rigid-body dynamics model using the AnyBody Modeling System. The scapula and clavicle were connected by the acromioclavicular joint capsule, the conoid ligament, and the trapezoid ligament. Subject-specific ligament properties were calculated by matching computer predictions to experimental force-displacement data.

RESULTS

The calculated free lengths of the conoid, trapezoid, and acromioclavicular ligaments were 13.5 (±3.2), 11.8 (±2.4), and 11.0 (±2.7) mm, respectively. The calculated stiffnesses of the conoid, trapezoid, and acromioclavicular ligaments were 34.3 (±6.3), 28.4 (±3.2), and 33.8 (±8.2) N/mm, respectively. Root mean square deviation (RMSD) of predicted force-displacement curves relative to experimental force-displacement curves (during inferior and anteroposterior translation) was less than 1 mm. For validation of subject-specific models, after ligament properties were calculated, the RMSD of the predicted torque over 15° of internal rotation was 12% of maximum rotational torque (average for 6 specimens).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Acromioclavicular disruption results in multidirectional instability, which requires careful consideration of the individual contributions of the injured ligaments. In addition, variations in patient anatomy can significantly affect the biomechanical stability of the reconstruction. Subject-specific models can enhance our understanding of the individual and collective biomechanical contributions of the injured soft tissues to the multiaxial stability of the acromioclavicular joint. These models may also be useful for analyzing and assessing biomechanical stability after various types of surgical reconstruction.

Management of Acromioclavicular Injuries - Current Concepts

Introduction

Treatment of a patient with acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injury remains challenging for orthopedic surgeons. To date, there is debate over the optimal management of ACJ injuries. This review provides an overview of assessment, treatment, and future perspectives for the treatment of and research into ACJ.

Material and Methods

A scoping literature review was performed. The search was built including the following terms: acromioclavicular joint injuries or dislocation, and pathophysiology, etiology, anatomy, treatment, and trauma mechanism. The papers with evidence levels 1-3 were included in the current narrative review.

Results

A total of 2242 potential relevant studies were identified in the searches. After removal of duplicates, 432 studies were screened on their titles and abstracts, resulting in 35 studies being included in the review, based on the eligibility criteria.

Conclusion

The management of acute and chronic ACJ injuries is not clarified in the current literature. However, there is currently insufficient high-level evidence for the overall treatment options for ACJ injuries. If surgical intervention is decided upon in consultation with the patient, the complications may not outweigh the benefits. The multitude of existing techniques is indicative of the uncertainty surrounding this issue, and no gold standard has yet been established for treatment methods. An ideal classification would include not only vertical and horizontal instability, but also the severity of kinematic alterations of the shoulder complex. This indicates the need for a new and improved diagnostic tool for the classification of ACJ injuries.

Differences between Coracoclavicular, Acromioclavicular, or Combined Reconstruction Techniques on the Kinematics of the Shoulder Girdle

BACKGROUND

Although the coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments are classically reconstructed after acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries, biomechanical studies over the past decade have indicated the importance of an additional reconstruction of the AC ligaments. To date, no kinematic study has investigated the kinematic differences between these reconstruction strategies.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the restoration of shoulder motion after an AC injury using a CC ligament, an AC ligament, or a combined reconstruction technique.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

After creating a Rockwood grade V lesion in 14 cadaveric shoulders, the AC joint injury was treated with either a CC ligament reconstruction using a suspension device, an in situ AC ligament reconstruction using 2 coupled soft tissue anchors, or a combination of these 2 techniques. Joint motions were registered during humerothoracic elevation in the coronal plane and protraction in the intact shoulder in a Rockwood V lesion and after the 3 reconstruction strategies. An optical navigation system measured 3-dimensional rotation in the sternoclavicular and scapulothoracic joints, and both rotation and translation were analyzed in the AC joint.

RESULTS

In the sternoclavicular joint, the CC and combined reconstruction techniques adequately restored clavicular axial rotation, while the AC reconstruction technique showed a better correction of clavicular elevation. Scapulothoracic joint rotations were best restored by reconstructing the AC ligaments. In the AC joint, the relative tilting position and the lateral rotation of the scapula compared with the clavicle were best restored by the suspension device and combined reconstruction. The AC ligament reconstruction technique demonstrated a better restoration of the relative protracted position and resulted in a better correction of the translation of the scapula relative to the clavicle.

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates that there are kinematic differences between AC, CC, or combined ligament reconstruction strategies. Although each technique was able to restore different elements of the joint kinematics, none of the strategies completely restored the shoulder girdle to its preinjured state.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Humerothoracic movements after Rockwood V lesions are best restored using the CC reconstruction technique, and scapulothoracic movements are best restored using the AC ligament reconstruction technique.

Combination of Surgical Techniques Restores Multidirectional Biomechanical Stability of Acromioclavicular Joint

PURPOSE

To measure the multiaxial stability of the acromioclavicular joint before and after transection of the acromioclavicular capsule and coracoclavicular ligaments and after sequential repair of acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular ligaments.

METHODS

Biomechanical testing was performed on fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders (N = 6). Translational and rotational stability in the vertical and horizontal planes was measured in intact specimens, after transecting the acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular ligaments, and after sequentially performing the following procedures: single-bundle coracoclavicular repair (CCR), modified Weaver-Dunn procedure (WD), and acromioclavicular stabilization (ACS).

RESULTS

Resecting the acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular significantly reduced translational stiffness in the inferior and anteroposterior directions, as well as rotational stiffness about the vertical and anteroposterior axes. All 3 surgical procedures increased inferior translational stiffness relative to the intact condition (Intact: 38 ± 9 N/mm, CCR: 54 ± 23 N/mm (P = .03), CCR+WD 52 ± 20 N/mm (P = .07), CCR ± WD+ACS 50 ± 21 N/mm (P = .17)). However, the combination of CCR, modified WD, and ACS resulted in the greatest increase in stiffness in internal rotation (Intact: 12.5 ± 7.4 cNm/deg, CCR: 1.2 ± 1.1 cNm/deg, CCR+WD 7.2 ± 3.0 N∗m/deg [P = .023], CCR+WD+ACS 11.6 ± 4.9 cNm/deg [P = .055]).

CONCLUSIONS

The cumulative stability of CCR, WD reconstruction, and ACS appears to be additive. Our findings provide a biomechanical justification for combining all three techniques. Biomechanical studies assessing the performance of various acromioclavicular repairs and reconstructions should therefore incorporate multiaxial testing in their protocols.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Multiple points of fixation that provide multidirectional stability have the potential to improve clinical outcomes and reduce failure rates of acromioclavicular joint repair or stabilization.

Kinematic Alterations in the Shoulder Complex in Rockwood V Acromioclavicular Injuries During Humerothoracic and Scapulothoracic Movements: A Whole-Cadaver Study

BACKGROUND

Previous cadaveric kinematic studies on acromioclavicular injuries described mainly rotational differences during humerothoracic movements. Although isolated scapulothoracic movements are also often performed during activities of daily life and can be painful after acromioclavicular injuries, they have not been extensively studied. Further, the analysis of joint translations in kinematic studies has received little attention compared with biomechanical studies.

HYPOTHESIS

A kinematic analysis of joint motions in the intact shoulder versus a shoulder with Rockwood V injury would demonstrate a different pattern of kinematic alterations during humerothoracic and scapulothoracic movements.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

A kinematic analysis was performed in 14 cadaveric shoulders during 3 humerothoracic passive movements (coronal and sagittal plane elevation and horizontal adduction) and 3 scapulothoracic passive movements (protraction, retraction, and shrug). An optical navigation system registered rotational motions in the sternoclavicular, scapulothoracic, and acromioclavicular joints in the intact and Rockwood V conditions. In the acromioclavicular joint, mediolateral, anteroposterior, and superoinferior translations were also analyzed.

RESULTS

In the Rockwood V condition, a significant increase in clavicular elevation in the sternoclavicular joint during both humerothoracic and scapulothoracic movements was demonstrated, whereas a significant decrease in posterior rotation of the clavicle occurred only during humerothoracic movements. In the scapulothoracic joint, the scapular position changed most significantly during protraction. In the acromioclavicular joint, the scapular tilting position was altered significantly during both humerothoracic and scapulothoracic movements, whereas the scapular rotational position changed only during coronal and sagittal plane elevation. The largest significant changes in the scapular protraction position were seen during protraction movement. Further, in the acromioclavicular joint there was a significant inferior translation of the scapula during all motions, a significant anterior translation during protraction and horizontal adduction, and a significant posterior translation during coronal plane elevation. Mediolaterally, the acromial end of the scapula slid further under the distal clavicle during protraction than during horizontal adduction.

CONCLUSION

Large kinematic differences were seen between the intact state and a Rockwood V lesion not only during humerothoracic movements but also during scapulothoracic movements in the cadaveric model. During humerothoracic movements, rotational differences were mainly caused by alterations in the clavicular position. In contrast, during protraction, the alterations in the scapular position were the dominant factor.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study demonstrates that protraction induces larger kinematic alterations than horizontal adduction in acromioclavicular injuries and can therefore be included in both clinical examination and kinematic analyses to identify lesions more clearly.

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.

Acromioclavicular joint reconstruction implants have differing ability to restore horizontal and vertical plane stability

PURPOSE

Persistent acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) instability following high grade injuries causes significant symptoms. The importance of horizontal plane stability is increasingly recognised. There is little evidence of the ability of current implant methods to restore native ACJ stability in the vertical and horizontal planes. The purpose of this work was to measure the ability of three implant reconstructions to restore native ACJ stability.

METHODS

Three groups of nine fresh-frozen shoulders each were mounted into a robotic testing system. The scapula was stationary and the robot displaced the clavicle to measure native anterior, posterior, superior and inferior (A, P, S, I) stability at 50 N force. The ACJ capsule, conoid and trapezoid ligaments were transected and the ACJ was reconstructed using one of three commercially available systems. Two systems (tape loop + screw and tape loop + button) wrapped a tape around the clavicle and coracoid, the third system (sutures + buttons) passed directly through tunnels in the clavicle and coracoid. The stabilities were remeasured. The data for A, P, S, I stability and ranges of A-P and S-I stability were analyzed by ANOVA and repeated-measures Student t tests with Bonferroni correction, to contrast each reconstruction stability versus the native ACJ data for that set of nine specimens, and examined contrasts among the reconstructions.

RESULTS

All three reconstructions restored the range of A-P stability to that of the native ACJ. However, the coracoid loop devices shifted the clavicle anteriorly. For S-I stability, only the sutures + buttons reconstruction did not differ significantly from native ligament restraint.

CONCLUSIONS

Only the sutures + buttons reconstruction, that passed directly through tunnels in the clavicle and coracoid, restored all stability measures (A, P, S, I) to the native values, while the tape implants wrapped around the bones anteriorised the clavicle. These findings show differing abilities among reconstructions to restore native stability in horizontal and vertical planes. (300 words).