Literature DB >> 20351202

Biomechanical comparison of a modified Weaver-Dunn and a free-tissue graft reconstruction of the acromioclavicular joint complex.

Michael G Michlitsch1, Gregory J Adamson, Marilyn Pink, Allyson Estess, James A Shankwiler, Thay Q Lee.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Most surgical reconstructions of the separated acromioclavicular joint do not address the injured ligaments and capsule of the acromioclavicular joint.
PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to compare the biomechanical characteristics of a modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction and an intramedullary acromioclavicular joint reconstruction that uses a free-tissue graft for reconstruction of both the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: Each pair of 6 matched pairs of cadaveric shoulders was randomly selected for a modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction on 1 side and the contralateral side was used for free-tissue graft reconstruction of the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligamentous complexes. Anterior-posterior and superior-inferior acromioclavicular joint translation (in millimeters) was measured with acromioclavicular joint compressions of 10, 20, and 30 N, and with translational loads of 10 and 15 N both before and after acromioclavicular joint reconstruction. Load-to-failure testing was then performed for each construct. Repeated-measures analysis of variance (translational testing) and Wilcoxon signed rank test (load-to-failure testing), both with P = .05, were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Mean anterior-posterior and superior-inferior translation of the intramedullary acromioclavicular joint reconstruction was significantly less than that of the modified Weaver-Dunn under all loading conditions (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively), but was not significantly different from that of the intact state (P = .656 and P = .173, respectively). Although the mean ultimate and yield loads and linear stiffness for the intramedullary acromioclavicular reconstruction were greater than that of the modified Weaver-Dunn reconstruction, this did not reach statistical significance (P = .625, P = .625, and P = .625, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Acromioclavicular joint reconstruction with free-tissue graft for both the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligamentous complexes demonstrates initial stability significantly better than a modified Weaver-Dunn and similar to that of intact specimens. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This acromioclavicular joint reconstruction provides the surgeon with a relatively nondestructive option.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20351202     DOI: 10.1177/0363546509361160

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  22 in total

1.  Acromioclavicular and coracoclavicular PDS augmentation for complete AC joint dislocation showed insufficient properties in a cadaver model.

Authors:  Frank Martetschläger; Arne Buchholz; Gunther Sandmann; Sebastian Siebenlist; Stefan Döbele; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Ulrich Stöckle; Peter J Millett; Florian Elser; Andreas Lenich
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  [Epidemiology, anatomy, biomechanics and imaging of acromioclavicular joint injuries].

Authors:  M Wellmann; T Smith
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Unstable acromioclavicular joint injuries: Is there really a difference between surgical management in the acute or chronic setting?

Authors:  Luis Natera Cisneros; Juan Sarasquete Reiriz
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2016-10-25

Review 4.  Allo- and autografts show comparable outcomes in chronic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction: a systematic review.

Authors:  Martin Eigenschink; Philipp R Heuberer; Leo Pauzenberger; Grant E Garrigues; Leonard Achenbach; Sigbjorn Dimmen; Brenda Laky; Lior Laver
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-02-10       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Ryan J Warth; Frank Martetschläger; Trevor R Gaskill; Peter J Millett
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2013-03

6.  Acromioclavicular joint augmentation at the time of coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction fails to improve functional outcomes despite significantly improved horizontal stability.

Authors:  Robert W Jordan; Shahbaz Malik; Kieran Bentick; Adnan Saithna
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Coracoid clavicular tunnel angle is related with loss of reduction in a single-tunnel coracoclavicular fixation using a dog bone button in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Joong-Bae Seo; Dong-Ho Lee; Kyu-Beom Kim; Jae-Sung Yoo
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Shoulder acromioclavicular joint reconstruction options and outcomes.

Authors:  Simon Lee; Asheesh Bedi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-12

9.  Surgical treatment of fresh complete acromioclavicular dislocation by coracoid process transfer and k-wire transfixation.

Authors:  Yeming Wang; Jianguo Zhang
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2012-06-16       Impact factor: 0.656

10.  Outcomes of acromioclavicular joint dislocation using tightrope arthroscopy.

Authors:  Arsalan Mahmoodian; Pedram Yavari; Pouya Moshkdar; Saeed Karimimatloub; Sepehr Eslami; Mina Shakery Boroujeni; Ghasem Mohammadsharifi
Journal:  Int J Burns Trauma       Date:  2021-04-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.