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

Choice of Acromioclavicular Dislocation Treatment Should Not Be Influenced by Risk of Development of Acromioclavicular Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

It is currently unknown to what degree surgical or nonoperative treatment of acromioclavicular (AC) dislocation influences the development of osteoarthritis (OA). The aim of this study was to evaluate AC OA after surgical and nonoperative treatment for AC dislocations, compare OA prevalence between treatment options, and compare OA prevalence between the injured and contralateral shoulder.

METHODS

Articles reporting on the prevalence of OA after surgical or nonoperative treatment of an AC dislocation with a minimal 2-year follow-up were included. AC OA presence was extracted for the injured and contralateral shoulder. Treatment categories were defined based on anatomical variation in the reattachment of ligaments: AC fixation, coracoclavicular (CC) fixation, AC and CC fixation, Bosworth screw synthetic graft, tendon graft, and conservative. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

Ninety-four articles were included for qualitative analysis, and 7 articles were included for meta-analysis (n = 3,812; follow-up = 2.0-24.2 years; mean age 37.6 ± 10.4 years). A total of 3,483 patients underwent surgical treatment, and 329 patients underwent conservative treatment. OA prevalence ranged from 6.7%-29.3% between 7 pooled treatment categories. Most included studies had a follow-up <10 years (94%) and OA prevalence increased with time, regardless of treatment option. There was no difference in OA prevalence between the injured and contralateral shoulder (p = 0.120). MINORS scores were varied, ranging from poor to very good.

CONCLUSION

The pooled AC OA prevalence of the 7 treatment categories ranged from 6.7% for the CC fixation surgical group to 29.3% for the conservative treatment group. However, the included studies were predominantly of low quality and had varying follow-up periods, with most having relatively short follow-up durations. No difference in AC OA prevalence was found between the injured and contralateral shoulder. Based on the available evidence, treatment choice for AC dislocation should not be influenced by the potential development of AC AO.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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.

The Effect of Clavicular Tunnel Position on Reduction Loss in Patients with Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations Operated with a Single-Bundle Suspensory Loop Device

OBJECTIVE

The treatment of acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocations offers numerous options, and ongoing debates persist regarding their comparative effectiveness. Among these options, the suspensory loop device (SLD) is one of the most favored treatment modalities. Despite the observed high reduction loss rate associated with SLD, the treatment yields favorable clinical outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with acute type 3 and 5 ACJ dislocations who underwent open and arthroscopic procedures using a single-bundle SLD, and to evaluate the effect of clavicular tunnel position on reduction loss.

METHODS

Thirty-seven eligible patients diagnosed with acute type 3 and type 5 ACJ dislocation who underwent open and arthroscopic surgery with a single-bundle SLD between January 2015 and March 2022 were evaluated retrospectively. Demographic data and radiological measurements including coracoclavicular (CC) interval, clavicle length (CL), and implant distance (ID) were recorded. The ID/CL ratio was calculated and a value between 0.17 and 0.24 was considered as "acceptable implant position". Reduction loss and other complications were noted. Patients were divided into two groups: open (Group 1) and arthroscopic (Group 2). Constant Murray Score (CMS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were used for clinical and functional outcomes. Non-parametric tests were used for statistical analysis of variables.

RESULTS

The study included six females (16.2%) and 31 males (83.8%) with a mean age of 40.2 ± 14.7 years (range: 20-75). The mean follow-up period was 22.3 ± 16.7 months (range: 6-72). The average time from trauma to surgery was 6.3 ± 5.3 days (range: 1-18). At the last follow-up, the CMS was 89.3 ± 8.8 and the VAS score was 2.1 ± 0.9. The mean ID/CL ratio was 0.19 ± 0.1 and 19 patients (51.4%) were between 0.17 and 0.24. Reduction loss was observed in nine patients (24.3%). There were no significant differences between Group 1 and Group 2 regarding operation time (p = 0.998), ID/CL ratio (p = 0.442), reduction loss (p = 0.458), CMS (p = 0.325), and VAS score (p = 0.699). Of the 28 patients without reduction loss, 16 had an ID/CL ratio between 0.17 and 0.24 (p = 0.43). Furthermore, within the 0.17-0.24 interval, CMS was higher with an average of 91.8 ± 5.1 compared to the other intervals (p = 0.559).

CONCLUSION

The clinical and functional outcomes of acute type 3 and type 5 ACJ dislocation operated open and arthroscopically with single-bundle SLD are similar and satisfactory. A clavicular tunnel position in the range of 0.17-0.24 (ID/CL ratio) is recommended to maintain postoperative reduction.

Mid-term clinical and sonographic outcomes of minimally invasive acromioclavicular joint reconstruction: mini-open versus arthroscopically assisted

INTRODUCTION

The current literature describes various operative stabilization strategies which achieve good clinical outcomes after acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation. The aim of this study was to compare the mid-term clinical and sonographic treatment outcomes after minimally invasive mini-open and arthroscopic reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective two-center study of patients with acute ACJ dislocation. Surgical treatment was performed using either a mini-open approach (MIOP) or an arthroscopic technique (AR). The primary outcome parameters of this study were the sonographically measured acromioclavicular (ACD) and coracoclavicular distances (CCD). Secondary outcome parameters included the Constant-Murley score (CS), range of motion (ROM), postoperative pain scale (VAS), return to daily routine, return to sports, complications, as well as operative revisions.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 29 months, 30 patients were included in this study with an average age of 41.3 ± 14.8 years (MIOP) and 41.2 ± 15.4 years (AR). The sonographic ACD (MIOP 9.11 mm vs. AR 8.93 mm, p = 0.41) and CCD (MIOP 25.08 mm vs. AR 24.36 mm, p = 0.29) distances showed no statistically significant differences. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference when compared to the contralateral side (p = 0.42). With both techniques, patients achieved excellent clinical outcome parameters without statistically significant differences in CS (MIOP 95 vs. AR 97, p = 0.11) and VAS (MIOP 1.76 vs. AR 1.14, p = 0.18). The return to daily activity and return to sport rates did not differ. There were neither complications nor revisions in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both minimally invasive techniques for acute ACJ stabilization achieved excellent clinical and sonographic outcomes without one technique being statistically superior to the other.

Minimally invasive reconstruction of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries using the TwinBridge button system

INTRODUCTION

Acute acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries are among the most common shoulder injuries in active young adults. The most frequently used surgical treatments include the hook plate implantation and arthroscopic treatment using flip-button systems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of treating acute ACJ injuries using a new minimally invasive implant based on a flip-button system.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

From January 2016 to October 2019, a total of 20 patients with acute ACJ injuries (1 × Type III, 3 × Type IV, 16 × Type V) underwent surgery using the Twinbridge implant (Smith & Nephew). It is a prefabricated construct consisting of two Endobuttons connected with an UltraTape. One button is placed under the coracoid using a special aiming device and two buttons are placed on the clavicle. Preoperatively, 1 day postoperatively, 3 months and at least 1 year postoperatively, patients were clinically examined and bilateral stress view and axial radiographs were obtained. At final follow-up, the simple shoulder test (SST), Taft score, Constant score, and ACJ instability (ACJI) score were recorded and a side-to-side ratio of the coracoclavicular (CC) distance was calculated.

RESULTS

All 20 patients were contacted at final follow-up at a mean of 28 (min. 13, max 50) months. Six patients were not willing to come for a clinical and radiographic examination and were contacted via telephone. All six patients were free of complaints. Another two patients free of complaints refused radiographs at final follow-up. The patients presented a mean SST of 99.6% (20 patients, min. 91.7, max. 100), Taft score of 11.6/12 points (12 patients, min. 10, max. 12), ACJI of 85.5/90 points (12 patients, min. 78, max. 90), and a Constant score of 97.1 (14 patients, min. 81.0, max. 100) for the affected shoulder. Preoperative stress view images revealed a mean side-to-side difference of the CC distance with a ratio of 1:2.34 (min. 1:1.80, max. 1:3.33). At final follow-up, CC distance was calculated with a mean ratio of 1:1.12 (min. 1.1, max. 1:1.38). Axial images showed a proper position in all cases. A "perfect" radiological result was achieved in six patients (50%) with a side-to-side CC distance of less than 10% (ratio 1:1.1 or less). A Rockwood type II result was achieved in five patients (42%) with a distance of 10 to 25% (ratio 1.11-1.25). One (8%) presented with a Rockwood type III result with a difference of more than 25% (ratio 1:1.38) and was considered a radiological failure.

CONCLUSIONS

When used correctly, the Twinbridge implant offers good-to-excellent clinical and radiographic results using a minimally invasive surgical technique. Complication rate is comparable to other button-systems.

Long-term stability of coracoclavicular suture fixation for acute acromioclavicular joint separation

PURPOSE

The optimal (SBJI) surgical treatment for acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint disruption remains controversial. What is being presented is the long-term functional outcomes of a double cross-looped coracoclavicular (CC) suture technique with the intention of restoring both anteroposterior and superior displacement of the clavicle.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2016, 81 patients underwent surgical reconstruction for acute acromioclavicular joint (AC) disruption in two orthopaedic centers. Two patients died for reasons unrelated to the treatment, and seven missed the final follow-up appointment, leaving 72 patients (67 males; 5 females; age 37 ± 12.4; range 15-64 years) for clinical and radiological assessments. All cases were classified according to the Rockwood classification as type III (n = 34), IV (n = 14) or V (n = 24). The dislocation was repaired with double cross-looped CC fixation using four Ethibond sutures passing underneath the coracoid and through a 4.5 mm drill hole in the clavicle in opposing directions to control both anteroposterior and vertical displacement. Radiological investigation preoperatively and at the last follow-up included anteroposterior and/or Zanca views, axillary or Alexander views, and comparative stress radiography of both AC joints. Patients were evaluated clinically with the Constant-Murley score (CMS) and Acromio Clavicular Joint Instability Score (ACJIS). Loss of reduction, subluxation, CC ligament ossification, post-traumatic arthritis, and peri-implant fractures were also recorded.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients were available for the last clinical and radiological evaluations. At a median follow-up period of 6.3 ± 2.1 years (range 3-12 years), the CMS and ACJIS were 92.1 ± 7.2 (range 60-100 points) and 90.4 ± 8.6 (range 45-100 points), respectively. Complications included 9 (12.5%) patients with slight loss of reduction, 2 (1.7%) with dislocation recurrence, 1 (1.3%) with superficial infection, 1 (1.3%) with a fracture of the lateral end of the clavicle, and 2 (1.7%) with persistent tenderness in the AC joint. The incidence of periarticular ossification was 22.4% and did not affect the final outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

This technique represents an effective and low-cost treatment for acute AC joint separations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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.

Mini open triple tunnel- double flip button techniques in treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint injuries: Case report

Acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries are common and often occur in a contact sport activity. Most acute AC joint injuries surgery techniques focus on coracoclavicular (CC) ligament complex fixation; by single or double clavicle tunnel, but persisting vertical instability. In this paper, we introduce mini open triple tunnel- double flip button (TTDB) technique for acute AC joint dislocation by adding tunnel on clavicle to expand coverage of footprint of conoid and trapezoid ligament in order to improve vertical stability of the AC joint. This method is based on CC ligament augmentation with a double flip button/polydioxanone (PDS), combined with V-loop pulley suture for anatomical fixation. This is a prospective case report. Two professional, male basketball players in this study with a mean age of 25 years underwent surgery in 2019. Clinical subjective outcome, VAS score, Nottingham Clavicle Score, and radiological CC distance were measured before and after the operation. There were noticeable improvement in the patients' recovery after two years since the operation. We introduce TTDB technique as one of the open techniques for acute AC joint injuries in limited-resource hospital setting.