Literature DB >> 27821995

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

Luis Natera Cisneros1, Juan Sarasquete Reiriz2.   

Abstract

AIM: To compare the outcomes of unstable ACJ injuries managed with an arthroscopy-assisted anatomic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular (CC) ligaments in the acute and chronic setting.
METHODS: A retrospective revision was performed. The SF36, visual analog scale for pain, DASH questionnaire, constant score and the global satisfaction were assessed at the last follow-up visit.
RESULTS: 22 patients were included. Results of the questionnaires assessed at the last follow-up visit showed no significant differences between the study groups.
CONCLUSION: Management of ACJ injuries in the acute or chronic setting may involve comparable outcomes if biological and mechanical aspects are considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acute and chronic setting; Anatomic reconstruction; Arthroscopy-assisted; Timeline; Unstable acromioclavicular joint injuries

Year:  2016        PMID: 27821995      PMCID: PMC5090232          DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2016.10.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop        ISSN: 0972-978X


  30 in total

1.  The surgical treatment of Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular dislocations.

Authors:  G Mignani; R Rotini; R Olmi; L Marchiodi; C A Veronesi
Journal:  Chir Organi Mov       Date:  2002 Jul-Sep

2.  Anatomical acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction: a biomechanical comparison of reconstructive techniques of the acromioclavicular joint.

Authors:  Paul W Grutter; Steve A Petersen
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 6.202

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

Authors:  Michael G Michlitsch; Gregory J Adamson; Marilyn Pink; Allyson Estess; James A Shankwiler; Thay Q Lee
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2010-03-29       Impact factor: 6.202

4.  ISAKOS upper extremity committee consensus statement on the need for diversification of the Rockwood classification for acromioclavicular joint injuries.

Authors:  Knut Beitzel; Augustus D Mazzocca; Klaus Bak; Eiji Itoi; William B Kibler; Raffy Mirzayan; Andreas B Imhoff; Emilio Calvo; Guillermo Arce; Kevin Shea
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.772

5.  Associated lesions requiring additional surgical treatment in grade 3 acromioclavicular joint dislocations.

Authors:  Paolo Arrigoni; Paul C Brady; Leonardo Zottarelli; Johannes Barth; Pablo Narbona; David Huberty; Samuel S Koo; Christopher R Adams; Peter Parten; Patrick J Denard; Patrick Denard; Stephen S Burkhart
Journal:  Arthroscopy       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 4.772

6.  Early failures with single clavicular transosseous coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Jay B Cook; James S Shaha; Douglas J Rowles; Craig R Bottoni; Steven H Shaha; John M Tokish
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 3.019

7.  Acute surgical treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation type V with a hook plate: superiority to late reconstruction.

Authors:  Johan von Heideken; Helena Boström Windhamre; Viveka Une-Larsson; Anders Ekelund
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2012-04-21       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Arthroscopically assisted stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations.

Authors:  Markus Scheibel; Silvia Dröschel; Christian Gerhardt; Natascha Kraus
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 6.202

9.  Semitendinosus tendon graft versus a modified Weaver-Dunn procedure for acromioclavicular joint reconstruction in chronic cases: a prospective comparative study.

Authors:  Mark Tauber; Katharina Gordon; Heiko Koller; Michael Fox; Herbert Resch
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  2008-09-25       Impact factor: 6.202

10.  Acromioclavicular dislocation Rockwood III-V: results of early versus delayed surgical treatment.

Authors:  Olaf Rolf; Andreas Hann von Weyhern; Alexander Ewers; Thomas Dirk Boehm; Frank Gohlke
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2007-11-22       Impact factor: 3.067

View more
  4 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  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

Review 3.  Biologic and synthetic ligament reconstructions achieve better functional scores compared to osteosynthesis in the treatment of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation.

Authors:  Maristella F Saccomanno; Giuseppe Sircana; Valentina Cardona; Valeria Vismara; Alessandra Scaini; Andrea G Salvi; Stefano Galli; Giacomo Marchi; Giuseppe Milano
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-08-14       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  High grade acromioclavicular injury: Comparison of arthroscopic assisted acromioclavicular joint fixation and anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction.

Authors:  Bancha Chernchujit; Arrisna Artha
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-04-25
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.