Literature DB >> 25998014

Two-Year Outcomes After Primary Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction.

Peter J Millett1, Marilee P Horan2, Ryan J Warth2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to report the clinical and structural outcomes after anatomic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction (ACCR) with free tendon allografts in patients with grade III and grade V acromioclavicular (AC) joint dislocations.
METHODS: Thirty-one shoulders underwent primary ACCR with tendon allografts for Rockwood grade III and grade V AC joint dislocations. Preoperative data included patient demographic characteristics, injury characteristics, and surgical history, along with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, Short Form 12 Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) scores, and various pain scales. Outcome measures were also collected a minimum of 2 years postoperatively with the addition of Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) scores; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores; and patient satisfaction. In addition, preoperative and postoperative coracoclavicular distances were analyzed using standard anteroposterior radiographs.
RESULTS: ACCR was performed in 31 patients (31 shoulders) with a mean age of 43.9 years (range, 21 to 71 years). In 7 patients (22.6%) a complication occurred that required a subsequent surgical procedure including graft rupture/attenuation (2), clavicle fractures (2), distal clavicle hypertrophy (2), and adhesive capsulitis (1). Of the remaining 24 patients, 20 (83.3%) had subjective outcome data available after a minimum 2-year follow-up period (mean, 3.5 years; range, 2.0 to 6.2 years). The mean postoperative ASES and SF-12 PCS scores significantly improved when compared with the preoperative baseline values (58.9 v 93.8 for ASES scores [P < .001] and 45.3 v 54.4 for SF-12 PCS scores [P = .007]). At final follow-up, the SANE and QuickDASH scores were 89.1 and 5.6, respectively, with a median patient satisfaction rating of 9 of 10.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients who did not require revision surgery showed excellent postoperative outcome scores: The mean ASES score was 93.8, the mean SANE score was 89.1, and the mean QuickDASH score was 5.6, with a median patient satisfaction rating of 9 of 10. Further study regarding ACCR techniques should focus on decreasing the risks of complications and maintaining reduction of the AC joint. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.
Copyright © 2015 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25998014     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.03.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthroscopy        ISSN: 0749-8063            Impact factor:   4.772


  29 in total

1.  Horizontal and Vertical Stabilization of Acute Unstable Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries Arthroscopy-Assisted.

Authors:  Luis Natera Cisneros; Juan Sarasquete Reiriz; Marina Besalduch; Alexandru Petrica; Ana Escolà; Joaquim Rodriguez; Jan Carlo Fallone
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-11-23

2.  Arthroscopically Assisted Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction Technique Using Coracoclavicular Fixation and Soft-Tissue Grafts.

Authors:  Peter J Millett; Ryan J Warth; Joshua A Greenspoon; Marilee P Horan
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-10-21

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.  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

6.  Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction.

Authors:  Anthony J Scillia; E Lyle Cain
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-12-28

Review 7.  [Current aspects and new techniques in dislocation of the shoulder joint].

Authors:  J Abel; M A Zumstein; L Bolliger; M O Schär
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 8.  Shoulder acromioclavicular joint reconstruction options and outcomes.

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

Review 9.  Anatomic reconstruction of the acromioclavicular joint provides the best functional outcomes in the treatment of chronic instability.

Authors:  Giuseppe Sircana; Maristella F Saccomanno; Fabrizio Mocini; Vincenzo Campana; Piermarco Messinese; Andrea Monteleone; Andrea Salvi; Alessandra Scaini; Almerico Megaro; Giuseppe Milano
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.