Suture Button Versus Hook Plate for Acute Unstable Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: A Meta-analysis

Acromioclavicular joint separation: Controversies and treatment algorithm

In this article, we present an uptodate outline of acromioclavicular (AC) joint separation. A clear understanding of acromioclavicular joint injury in terms of the mechanism of injury, clinical picture, diagnostic imaging, and most updated surgical techniques used for the treatment can provide the best care for those patients. This article describes updated treatment strategies for AC separation, including type III AC separation which is known most controversial. Finally, we present a proposed treatment algorithm that can aid in the treatment of AC separation from the most updated evidence.

Suture Button Could Result in More Functional Outcomes Improvement and Pain Relief Than Hook Plate Technique for Treating Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies

PURPOSE

To systematically review the current evidence to compare the differences in outcomes of the suture button (SB) versus hook plate (HP) fixations for treating acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation (ACD).

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A literature search of the Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases was performed and Level I-IV evidence studies comparing the SB and HP procedures for acute ACD were included. Studies that met the following exclusion criteria were excluded: (1) letters, comments, case reports, reviews, animal studies, cadaveric studies, biomechanical studies, and study protocols; (2) incomplete data; and (3) repeated studies and data. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to evaluate the quality of nonrandomized studies. Constant score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, operation time, coracoclavicular distance (CCD), and complications were recorded and the mean differences of VAS and Constant were compared with preset minimal clinically important difference.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies with 363 patients treated with SB procedures and 432 patients with the HP procedure were included. In terms of patient-reported outcomes, 5 of the 13 included studies reported significantly greater Constant score in SB group and most (4/5) used arthroscopic SB technique. Statistically significant differences in favor of SB were found in 3 of the 7 included studies in terms of VAS score whereas none of them reached the minimal clinically important difference. In terms of recurrent instability, no statistically significant difference was noted. All studies showed that the SB technique resulted in lower estimated blood loss. No difference was detected in CCD and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current body of evidence, it is suggested that employment of the SB technique may confer advantageous outcomes when compared to the HP technique in acute ACD patients. These potential benefits may include higher Constant scores, lower pain levels, and no discernible increases in operation time, CCD, or complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

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.

Long-term Clinical Outcomes After TightRope Versus Hook Plate Fixation for Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation

Background

There is limited information regarding the long-term efficacy of techniques for surgical fixation after acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation.

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of hook plate (HP) and TightRope (TR) fixation for acute AC joint dislocations by comparing the long-term clinical and radiological patient outcomes.

Study Design

Cohort study, Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed data from 61 patients with acute AC joint dislocation between July 2011 and November 2015. The patients were grouped according to surgical procedure: HP (n = 36) and TR (n = 25). Clinical outcomes at final follow-up were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgery score; the Korean Shoulder Score; and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score. Side-to-side coracoclavicular (CC) distance on radiographs, postoperative complications, and the rate of subacromial erosion in the HP group were also assessed between procedures.

Results

The mean follow-up period was 7.0 ± 1.0 years, and there were no significant differences in pain or outcome scores between the HP and TR groups (all P > .05). Forward flexion was better in the TR group (172.6° ± 5.6°) versus the HP group (166.0° ± 10.8°; P = .002). The percentages of patients with a difference in the side-to-side CC distance of <5 mm were 83.3% and 72.0% in the HP and TR groups, respectively (P = .288). Complications were found in 2 patients in the HP group and 1 in the TR group (P ≥ .999). Subacromial erosion was observed in 41.7% of patients after HP fixation, with no difference in VAS pain scores at the final follow-up in patients with versus without subacromial erosion (P = .719).

Conclusion

When comparing HP with TR fixation for the treatment of acute AC joint dislocations, there were no significant differences in functional outcome scores, final CC distance, or complications. Slightly better forward flexion was seen after TR fixation. Subacromial erosion occurred in 40% of patients after HP fixation, but this did not affect long-term VAS pain scores. Both surgical techniques are effective treatment options for AC joint dislocation.

Clavicular hook plate versus dog-bone technique for acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a retrospective cohort study comparing clinical outcome scores, complications, and costs

INTRODUCTION

Arthroscopically assisted coracoclavicular (CC) ligament fixation techniques have been promoted as providing superior outcomes for the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocations. Nevertheless, there is a lack of high-level evidence for clinically relevant benefits. At our institute, orthopaedic surgeons use an arthroscopically assisted coracoclavicular ligament fixation technique (DB), while general trauma surgeons use a clavicular hook plate (cHP) technique. The aim of the study was to compare clinical outcomes, complication rates, and costs between the two groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The hospital database was searched for patients treated for acute traumatic high-grade (Rockwood Typ ≥ III) ACJ dislocation using either a cHP or arthroscopically assisted DB technique between 2010 and 2019. Seventy-nine patients could be included (56 patients in the cHP group and 23 in the DB group). QuickDASH scores, subjective shoulder value (SSV) scores, pain scores (numerical pain rating scale 10), and complication rates were retrospectively collected through phone interviews and by screening patient charts as well as surgical reports. Costs per patient were obtained from the hospital's accounting system.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 54 ± 33.7 and 45 ± 21.7 months in the cHP and DB group, respectively. QuickDASH and SSV scores did not differ, but patients in the cHP group reported significantly lower pain scores (p = 0.033). More patients reported hypertrophic or disturbing scars (p = 0.49) and sensibility disturbances (p = 0.007) in the cHP group. Three patients suffered from a frozen shoulder in the DB group (p = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

Patient-reported outcomes are excellent after long-term follow-up for both techniques. There are no clinically relevant differences in clinical outcome scores based on our results and a review of the literature. Both techniques certainly have their benefits regarding secondary outcome measures.

LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE

Level 3, retrospective cohort study.

Transcoracoid Drilling for Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstructions in Patients With Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations Result in Eccentric Tunnels

Purpose

To determine the location of coracoid inferior tunnel exit with superior-based tunnel drilling and coracoid superior tunnel exit with inferior-based tunnel drilling.

Methods

Fifty-two cadaveric embalmed shoulders (mean age 79 years, range 58-96 years) were used. A transcoracoid tunnel was drilled at the center of the base. Twenty-six shoulders were used for the superior-to-inferior tunnel drilling approach and 26 shoulders for the inferior-to-superior tunnel drilling approach. The distances to the margins of the coracoid process, from both the entry and exit points of the tunnel, were measured. Paired Student t-tests were used to compare the distance from the center of the tunnel and the medial and lateral coracoid border and the apex.

Results

The mean difference for the distances between superior entry and inferior exit from the apex was 3.65 ± 3.51 mm (P = .002); 1.57 ± 2.27 mm for the lateral border (P = .40) and 5.53 ± 3.45 mm for the medial border (P = .001). The mean difference for the distances between inferior entry and superior exit from the apex was 16.95 ± 3.11 mm (P = .0001); 6.51 ± 3.2 mm for the lateral border (P = .40) and 1.03 ± 2.32 mm for the medial border (P = .045). Inferior-to-superior drilling resulted in 4 (15%) cortical breaks.

Conclusions

Both superior-to-inferior and inferior-to-superior tunnel drilling directed the tunnel from a more anterior and medial entry to a posterior-lateral exit. Superior-to-inferior drilling resulted in a more posteriorly angled tunnel. When using a 5-mm reamer and inferior-to-superior tunnel drilling, cortical breaks were observed at the inferior and medial margin of the tunnel exit.

Clinical Relevance

Arthroscopic-assisted acromioclavicular joint reconstruction using conventional jigs may result in an eccentric coracoid tunnel, possibly introducing stress risers and fractures. To avoid cortical breaks and eccentric tunnel placement, open drilling from superior-to-inferior with a superiorly centered guide pin and arthroscopic visualization of a centered inferior exit should be considered.

SURGICAL TREATMENT OF ACROMIOCLAVICULAR DISLOCATION: HOOK PLATE VERSUS SUTURE BUTTON

Objectives

We aimed to compare the functional and radiographical outcomes of reconstruction of acute unstable acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation using Hook Plate (HP) versus Suture Endobutton (SE) fixation techniques.

Methods

Forty-six consecutive patients with grade III to V ACJ dislocation according to Rockwood classification who underwent either HP or SE fixation in the period between January 2017 and June 2020 were evaluated. The treatment modalities were divided into either HP or SE fixation. The radiological assessment included standard anterior-posterior (AP) views to evaluate coracoclavicular (CC) distances for vertical reduction.

Results

CC distances were grouped as preoperative (CC¹), early postoperative (CC²), and late postoperative (CC³). The distance variance between CC² and CC³ was referred as ΔCC (CC³ - CC²). A statistically significant difference was found in ΔCC between the two groups (p=0.008). ΔCC was significantly higher in the SE group compared to the HP group (p<0.05). The Constant and UCLA Scores of patients in the SE group were found to be significantly higher than in the HP group patients.

Conclusion

Clinical outcomes were more satisfactory in patients with acute unstable ACJ dislocation who underwent SE compared to HP procedures, at the end of the first year. Evidence Level IV; Case Series.

Surgery improves the clinical and radiological outcome in Rockwood type IV dislocations, whereas Rockwood type III dislocations benefit from conservative treatment

PURPOSE

Despite the available classifications, diagnostics and treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries are still vague and challenging for trauma and shoulder surgeons. This study aimed to evaluate the dynamic radiographic as well as clinical outcome of operatively and conservatively treated Rockwood (RW) type III and IV ACJ dislocations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with RW type III and IV ACJ dislocations between 2009 and 2016 (n = 226) were included in this retrospective data analysis with a prospective follow-up examination. According to their injury classification, patients were subdivided in an operative and conservative treatment group. Examiner blinded clinical evaluation including the constant score (CS), American shoulder and elbow surgery (ASES) score, the acromioclavicular joint instability (ACJI) score, visual analog scale (VAS), bilateral force measurements, and posttraumatic/postsurgical sequelae were assessed. Fluoroscopic evaluations including dynamic stability assessment with functional axillary views were performed for every patient.

RESULTS

For follow-up examination (mean 4.8 years ± 0.3 SEM) 56 patients (29 RW type III, 27 RW type IV) were available. In patients with RW type III ACJ dislocations [operative (n = 10); conservative (n = 19)] prolonged duration of treatment was seen in operatively treated patients (p < 0.05). Clear improvement could be shown for the ACJI score (p < 0.05) and coracoclavicular (CC) and acromioclavicular (AC) distance (p < 0.05) in the operative group. In patients with RW type IV ACJ dislocations [operative (n = 18); conservative (n = 9)] superior clinical results were found in operated patients with highly significant differences for the ACJI score (p < 0.001). Radiographic dynamic horizontal analysis showed nearly normalized anteroposterior translation in operated patients (p < 0.05). No differences were found regarding arthroscopic or open procedures.

CONCLUSION

Accurate diagnostics including sufficient dynamic stability assessment with functional axillary views are strongly advised for patients with ACJ dislocations. Conservative treatment should be recommended for patients with RW type III ACJ dislocations, due to shorter duration of treatment with good clinical results but lacking operative risks. In patients with RW type IV ACJ dislocations, surgical treatment is recommended because of superior clinical and radiological results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

No difference in 90-day complication rate following open versus arthroscopic Latarjet procedure

The purpose of this study was to compare the 90-day complication rate between the open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedure. A retrospective review of patients who underwent an open or arthroscopic Latarjet procedure at NYU Langone Health between 2012 and 2019 was performed. The complications, readmissions, and reoperations within 90 days were assessed. Outcomes were compared between the two approaches, and a p value of < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. The study included 150 patients (open: 110; arthroscopic: 40), with no patients lost to follow-up within the first 90 days. Both cohorts were similar in terms of patient demographics. No intra-operative complications were observed in either group. Overall, there were 4 post-operative complications with the open approach and 2 with the arthroscopic approach (3.6% and 5.0%, respectively; n.s.) during the study period. Three patients required a readmission within the 90-day period; one patient in both groups required a revision Latarjet for graft fracture, and one patient in the open Latarjet required irrigation and debridement for deep infection (n.s.). With the open approach, there were 2 (2.3%) wound complications, 1 graft complication, and 1 (1.1%) nerve injury. With the arthroscopic approach, there was 1 (2.8%) wound complication and 1 (2.8%) hardware complication. The safety, and 90-day complication and readmission profile of arthroscopic Latarjet is similar to open Latarjet procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

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 the TightRope system versus hook plate in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: a retrospective analysis

This study compared the results of the minimally invasive coracoclavicular (CC) fixation with a single TightRope (MITR) procedure and the hook plate (HP) procedure for acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocation treatment. Sixteen patients with a mean age of 44.9 ± 11 years were treated with the MITR procedure. Nineteen patients with a mean age of 40.2 ± 8.7 years were treated using the HP procedure. Clinical outcomes were evaluated with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, Constant–Murley Score (CMS), and University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder score. Vertical displacement of the clavicle with reference to the height of the acromion was measured in standard anteroposterior radiographs. The mean follow-up was 27 months in the MITR group and 30 months in the HP group. No statistically significant differences were found between the MITR group and the HR group in terms of VAS score (0.4 ± 0.6 vs 0.7 ± 0.6, P = 0.138), UCLA Shoulder score (33.9 ± 2.5 vs 33.7 ± 1.5, P = 0.843), or CMS (95.7 ± 7.3 vs 93.7 ± 6.6, P = 0.400). No redislocation was identified in the HP group, while redislocation occurred in 1 of 16 (6.3%) patients in the MITR group. One patient in the HP group (5.3%) had acromial osteolysis, while no acromial osteolysis was found in the MITR group. No other adverse events, such as infections, tunnel widening, fractures, or implant-related complications, were observed. Both procedures provided satisfactory results. The HP procedure provided better reduction, while the MITR procedure provided a slightly lower tendency of pain. Long-term follow-up is needed to investigate the clinical outcomes and radiological outcomes of both groups.

Editorial Commentary: Suture Button-Anchor Fixation Is Preferable to Hook Plate Fixation for Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations: Form and Function Need to Be United

Both hook plate fixation and suture button-anchor fixation have been reported to yield good results in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint reconstruction. In addition to a mandatory secondary procedure, hook plate fixation clearly has an increased prevalence of post-traumatic acromioclavicular arthritis in the short term that is likely to progress in the long term. Conversely, suture button-anchor fixation-a minimally invasive technique that creates less soft-tissue disruption, does not require hardware removal, and does not violate the acromioclavicular joint-is more likely to promote primary healing of the coracoclavicular ligaments, reduce the risk of late displacement, and minimize the development of post-traumatic acromioclavicular arthritis. As stated by the noted architect Frank Lloyd Wright, it is not only about form (i.e., alignment), it is about function as well.

Technical trick in suture-button suspensionplasty for the treatment of thumb carpometacarpal arthritis

Suture-button suspensionplasty has been popularized in the treatment of thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) arthritis in recent years. The surgical technique of this method was well defined previously. The most challenging and important part of this technique is the tensioning of the suture-button system to preserve first metacarpal height after trapeziectomy. In present study, we would like to present a technical trick about adjusting the tension while performing suspensionplasty using suture-button device in thumb CMC joint osteoarthritis. In the original technique, trapeziectomy is performed prior to fixation and tensioning of suture-button system. However, it is quite difficult to recreate the original trapezial space, since first metacarpal subsides after trapeziectomy. The trick in our technique is that trapezium remains in its anatomic position up to the end of the operation. Thus, we do not need to make effort to adjust the thumb ray height and use fluoroscopic imaging to ensure its position. In conclusion, we believe that our technique simplifies the most challenging part of the operation, shortens the operation time, preserves the original first ray height and diminishes the exposure of ionizing radiation as it reduces the need for fluoroscopy.

Arthroscopic Suture-Button Versus Hook-Plate Fixation for Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries-A Systematic Review of Comparative Studies

Purpose

To systematically review the comparative studies in the literature to compare joint stability, clinical outcomes, and complications of acromioclavicular joint fixation using a hook plate versus arthroscopic suture-button (SB) fixation.

Methods

A literature search was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines to identify clinical studies comparing the hook plate and arthroscopic SB techniques for acromioclavicular joint injuries. Qualitative statistical analysis was performed using SPSS, and a P value of ≤.05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Six clinical studies including 285 patients were included in the systematic review. In 3 of the studies, there was a significant difference in favor of SB for Constant score. Patients treated with the SB technique had a lower visual analog scale score at final follow-up in 2 of the 4 studies that measured this outcome. In addition, there were no significant difference in the rate of complications, revisions, or joint malreduction in any of the included studies.

Conclusions

The arthroscopic SB procedure resulted in lower postoperative pain scores, and improved postoperative functional outcomes, although this was not a clinically significant difference. In addition, there were no significant differences in the rate of complications, revisions, or joint malreduction.

Level of Evidence

Level III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.