Literature DB >> 26470802

Prognostic factors to succeed in surgical treatment of chronic acromioclavicular dislocations.

J Barth1, F Duparc2, L Baverel3, J Bahurel4, B Toussaint4, S Bertiaux2, P Clavert5, O Gastaud6, N Brassart7, E Beaudouin8, P De Mourgues9, D Berne10, M Duport11, N Najihi12, P Boyer13, B Faivre14, A Meyer15, G Nourissat16, S Poulain17, F Bruchou18, J F Ménard19.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocation (ACJD) remains a poorly known and controversial subject. Given the many surgical options, it is not always easy to determine which steps are indispensable.
METHODS: This article reports a multicenter prospective study. The clinical and radiological follow-up involved a comparative analysis of the preoperative and postoperative data at 1 year, including pain (visual analogue scale), subjective functional incapacity (QuickDASH), and the objective Constant score, as well as a comparative analysis of vertical and horizontal movements measured on simple x-rays.
RESULTS: Based on a series of 140 operated ACJDs, we included 24 chronic ACJDs. The mean time to surgery was 46 weeks (range, 1 month to 4 years). The patients' mean age was 41 years, with a majority of males (75%), 72% of whom participated in recreational sports. Professionally, 40% of the subjects had jobs involving manual labor. We noted 40% grade III, 24% grade IV, and 36% grade V injury according to the Rockwood classification. In 92% of cases, coracoclavicular stabilization was provided by a double button implant, reinforced with a biological graft in 88% of the cases. In 29%, millimeters to centimeters of the distal clavicle were resected and acromioclavicular stabilization was associated in 54%. We observed complications in 33% of the cases. At 1 year postoperative, 21 patients underwent clinical and radiological follow-up (87.5%). Only 35% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied, whereas 100% of them would recommend the operation. Full-time work was resumed in 91% of the cases and all sports could be resumed in 86%. The pre- and postoperative values at 1 year changed as follows: the mean Constant score improved from 61 to 87 (p=0.00002); the subjective QuickDASH score decreased from 41 to 9 (p=0.00002); and radiologically significant reduction of the initial displacement was observed in the vertical plane (p<10(-3)) and the horizontal plane (p=0.022).
CONCLUSION: In this study, the favorable prognostic factors found were: time to surgery less than 3 months (p=0.02), associated acromioclavicular stabilization, and postoperative immobilization with a sling extended to 6 weeks. However, resection of the distal clavicle did not influence the final result. LEVEL OF PROOF: Level II prospective non-randomized comparative study.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic acromioclavicular dislocation; Prognostic factors; Surgical treatment

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26470802     DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.09.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res        ISSN: 1877-0568            Impact factor:   2.256


  8 in total

1.  Repair of the entire superior acromioclavicular ligament complex best restores posterior translation and rotational stability.

Authors:  Daichi Morikawa; Felix Dyrna; Mark P Cote; Jeremiah D Johnson; Elifho Obopilwe; Florian B Imhoff; Knut Beitzel; Augustus D Mazzocca; Bastian Scheiderer
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Acromioclavicular joint dislocation: a Dog Bone button fixation alone versus Dog Bone button fixation augmented with acromioclavicular repair-a finite element analysis study.

Authors:  Sermsak Sumanont; Supachoke Nopamassiri; Artit Boonrod; Punyawat Apiwatanakul; Arunnit Boonrod; Chanakarn Phornphutkul
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2018-03-20

3.  Arthroscopically assisted single tunnel reconstruction for acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint dislocation with an additional acromioclavicular joint cerclage.

Authors:  Gunnar Jensen; Rony-Orijit Dey Hazra; Mireille Al-Ibadi; Katharina Salmoukas; Jan Christoph Katthagen; Helmut Lill; Alexander Ellwein
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-05-07

4.  The importance of biomechanical properties in revision acromioclavicular joint stabilization: a scoping review.

Authors:  Felix Dyrna; Daniel P Berthold; Matthias J Feucht; Lukas N Muench; Frank Martetschläger; Andreas B Imhoff; Augustus D Mazzocca; Knut Beitzel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  New quantitative radiographic parameters for vertical and horizontal instability in acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  Matthias A Zumstein; Philippe Schiessl; Benedikt Ambuehl; Lilianna Bolliger; Johannes Weihs; Martin H Maurer; Beat K Moor; Michael Schaer; Sumit Raniga
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Arthroscopic Coracoacromial Ligament Transfer Augmented With Suspensory V-Shaped Fixation System for Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation.

Authors:  Jean Kany; Hisham Anis Selim
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2019-06-11

7.  All-Arthroscopic Coracoacromial Ligament Transfer: The Modified Neviaser Procedure for Acromioclavicular Dislocations.

Authors:  Ausberto Velasquez Garcia; Magdalena Mendez; Glen Abdo
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2022-03-28

8.  Chronic acromioclavicular dislocations: multidirectional stabilization without grafting.

Authors:  José Antonio Cano-Martínez; Gregorio Nicolás-Serrano; Julio Bento-Gerard; Francisco Picazo Marín; Josefina Andres Grau; Mario López Antón
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-05-26
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.