Literature DB >> 26853948

Clinical Results After Conservative Management for Grade III Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries: Does Eventual Surgery Affect Overall Outcomes?

Maximilian Petri1, Ryan J Warth2, Joshua A Greenspoon2, Marilee P Horan2, Rachel F Abrams2, Dirk Kokmeyer3, Peter J Millett4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the clinical outcomes in patients with grade III acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries in whom nonoperative therapy was successfully completed and those who had nonoperative therapy failure and who proceeded to undergo surgical reconstruction.
METHODS: Forty-nine patients were initially treated nonoperatively for grade III AC joint injuries with physical therapy. Patients completed questionnaires at initial presentation and after a follow-up period of 2 years. Outcome measures included the Short Form 12 Physical Component Score; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score; Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score; and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score. Failure of nonoperative treatment occurred when a patient underwent AC reconstruction before final follow-up.
RESULTS: Forty-one patients with a mean age of 39 years (range, 18 to 79 years) were included. In this cohort, 29 of 41 patients (71%) successfully completed nonoperative therapy whereas 12 of 41 (30%) had nonoperative therapy failure at a median of 42 days (range, 6 days to 17.0 months). Of the 41 patients, 39 (95.3%) were contacted to determine treatment success. Of the 12 patients who had nonoperative therapy failure, 11 (92%) had sought treatment more than 30 days after the injury. Subjective follow-up data were available for 10 of 12 patients (83.3%) who had nonoperative therapy failure and for 23 of 29 patients (79.3%) who were successfully treated nonoperatively. The mean length of follow-up was 3.3 years (range, 1.8 to 5.9 years). Although there were no statistically significant differences in outcome scores between groups, those who sought treatment more than 30 days after their injury showed decreased postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores (P = .002) and Short Form 12 Physical Component Scores (P = .037).
CONCLUSIONS: According to our results, (1) a trial of nonoperative treatment is warranted because successful outcomes can be expected even in patients who eventually opt for surgery and (2) patients who presented more than 30 days after their injury were less likely to complete nonoperative treatment successfully. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
Copyright © 2016 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26853948     DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.11.024

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


  10 in total

1.  Arthroscopic Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction Using Knotless Coracoclavicular Fixation and Soft-Tissue Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Travis J Menge; Dimitri S Tahal; J Christoph Katthagen; Peter J Millett
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2017-01-09

2.  Concomitant glenohumeral pathologies associated with acute and chronic grade III and grade V acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Authors:  Gunnar Jensen; Peter J Millett; Dimitri S Tahal; Mireille Al Ibadi; Helmut Lill; Jan Christoph Katthagen
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 3.  Acromioclavicular joint injuries revisited: Pathoanatomy, pathomechanics, and clinical presentation.

Authors:  W Ben Kibler; Aaron Sciascia
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2022-09-01

4.  The Evolving Treatment Patterns of NCAA Division I Football Players by Orthopaedic Team Physicians Over the Past Decade, 2008-2016.

Authors:  Trevor J Carver; John B Schrock; Matthew J Kraeutler; Eric C McCarty
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.843

Review 5.  Nonoperative treatment of five common shoulder injuries: A critical analysis.

Authors:  Jonas Pogorzelski; Erik M Fritz; Jonathan A Godin; Andreas B Imhoff; Peter J Millett
Journal:  Obere Extrem       Date:  2018-02-19

Review 6.  Grade III Acromioclavicular Separations Treated With Suspensory Fixation Techniques: A Systematic Review of Level I Through IV Studies.

Authors:  Joseph J Ruzbarsky; Bryant P Elrick; Philip-C Nolte; Justin W Arner; Peter J Millett
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-08-05

7.  Nonoperative Management of Traumatic Acromioclavicular Joint Injury: A Clinical Commentary with Clinical Practice Considerations.

Authors:  Aaron Sciascia; Aaron J Bois; W Ben Kibler
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2022-04-01

8.  Rockwood Grade-III Acromioclavicular Joint Separation: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment Options.

Authors:  Sreten Franovic; Alex Pietroski; Noah Kuhlmann; Talal Bazzi; Yang Zhou; Stephanie Muh
Journal:  JB JS Open Access       Date:  2021-05-04

9.  Analysis of the bony geometry of the acromio-clavicular joint.

Authors:  Moritz Crönlein; Lukas Postl; Marc Beirer; Dominik Pförringer; Jennifer Lang; Frederik Greve; Michael Müller; Peter Biberthaler; Chlodwig Kirchhoff
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2018-10-23       Impact factor: 2.175

10.  High Prevalence of Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior Tears Associated With Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Separation of All Injury Grades.

Authors:  Sarav S Shah; Eric Ferkel; Kai Mithoefer
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-08-27
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.