Literature DB >> 24382728

Management of acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Xinning Li1, Richard Ma1, Asheesh Bedi2, David M Dines1, David W Altchek1, Joshua S Dines1.   

Abstract

Acromioclavicular joint injuries are among the most common shoulder girdle injuries in athletes and most commonly result from a direct force to the acromion with the arm in an adducted position. Acromioclavicular joint injuries often present with associated injuries to the glenohumeral joint, including an increased incidence of superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) tears that may warrant further evaluation and treatment. Anteroposterior stability of the acromioclavicular joint is conferred by the capsule and acromioclavicular ligaments, of which the posterior and superior ligaments are the strongest. Superior-inferior stability is maintained by the coracoclavicular (conoid and trapezoid) ligaments. Type-I or type-II acromioclavicular joint injuries have been treated with sling immobilization, early shoulder motion, and physical therapy, with favorable outcomes. Return to activity can occur when normal shoulder motion and strength are obtained and the shoulder is asymptomatic as compared with the contralateral normal extremity. The management of type-III injuries remains controversial and is individualized. While a return to the previous level of functional activity with nonsurgical treatment has been documented in a number of case series, surgical reduction and coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction has been associated with a favorable outcome and can be considered in patients who place high functional demands on their shoulders or in athletes who participate in overhead sports. Surgical management is indicated for high-grade (≥type IV) acromioclavicular joint injuries to achieve anatomic reduction of the acromioclavicular joint, reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments, and repair of the deltotrapezial fascia. Outcomes after surgical reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments have been satisfactory with regard to achieving pain relief and return to functional activities, but further improvements in the biomechanical strength of these constructs are necessary to avoid loss of reduction and creep with cyclic loading.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24382728     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00734

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  31 in total

1.  Anatomic and non-anatomic reconstruction improves post-operative outcomes in chronic acromio-clavicular instability: a systematic review.

Authors:  Francisco Xará-Leite; Renato Andrade; Pedro Silva Moreira; Luís Coutinho; Olufemi R Ayeni; Nuno Sevivas; João Espregueira-Mendes
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-02-26       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Radiographic features and complications following coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Brian P Kennedy; Zehava Sadka Rosenberg; Michael J Alaia; Mohammad Samim; Erin F Alaia
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2020-01-11       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Comparison of two methods for coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction: A finite element analysis.

Authors:  Emre Çalışal; Levent Uğur
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 1.511

4.  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

5.  Secondary infection of haematoma following closed acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Leanne Dupley; Andrew James Berg; Randeep Mohil
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2016-01-19

6.  Arthroscopically assisted acromioclavicular joint stabilization leads to significant clavicular tunnel widening in the early post-operative period.

Authors:  Siva Thangaraju; Serdar Cepni; Petra Magosch; Mark Tauber; Peter Habermeyer; Frank Martetschläger
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  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

8.  Early clinical and radiographic results of fixation with the TightRope device for Rockwood type V acromioclavicular joint dislocation: A retrospective review of 15 patients.

Authors:  Raşit Özcafer; Kutalmış Albayrak; Osman Lapçin; Engin Çetinkaya; Yavuz Arıkan; Murat Gül
Journal:  Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc       Date:  2020-09       Impact factor: 1.511

9.  Early complications of acromioclavicular joint reconstruction requiring reoperation.

Authors:  Dean Wang; Benjamin E Bluth; Chad R Ishmael; Jeremiah R Cohen; Jeffrey C Wang; Frank A Petrigliano
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-06-16       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Digital Technology Combined with 3D Printing to Evaluate the Matching Performance of AO Clavicular Hook Plates.

Authors:  Xuhua Wu; Gang Wang; Qingquan Xia; Ke Rong; Minfeng Gan; Gen Wen; Xiaofan Yin; Huilin Yang
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.