Jan Theopold1, Tobias Schöbel1, Jean-Pierre Fischer2, Sabine Löffler3, Georg Osterhoff1, Stefan Schleifenbaum2, Pierre Hepp4. 1. Division of Arthroscopy, Joint Surgery and Sport Injuries, Department of Orthopedic, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. 2. Zentrum Zur Erforschung Der Stütz- und Bewegungsorgane, ZESBO, Semmelweisstrasse 14, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. 3. Institute of Anatomy, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 13, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. 4. Division of Arthroscopy, Joint Surgery and Sport Injuries, Department of Orthopedic, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University of Leipzig, Liebigstraße 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. pierre.hepp@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Horizontal instability-especially in the posterior plane-is a common problem after acromioclavicular joint injuries. The purpose was to compare the stability of a single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique and a double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique for coraco-clavicular ligament reconstruction and to examine the influence of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage on the horizontal stability in the acromioclavicular joint. METHODS: 21 acromioclavicular joints of human cadaveric shoulders were randomly assigned to the following groups: single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with horizontal augmented acromioclavicular cerclage (SCT + AC); double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique (DCT); double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique and acromioclavicular cerclage (DCT + AC). The specimens underwent cyclic horizontal testing and were recorded using a 3D optical measuring system. RESULTS: The displacement and the increase in displacement in relation to the displacement after precondition for SCT + AC were significantly higher after every measured amount of cycles than for DCT (p10 = 0.0023; p5000 = 0.0012) and DCT + AC (p10 = 0.0006; p5000 = 0.0012). There was no significant difference in the total displacement, or in the increase in total displacement between double coraco-clavicular tunnel reconstructed groups with and without additional acromioclavicular cerclage. CONCLUSION: Double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with and without additional acromioclavicular cerclage results in a significant higher stability regarding the horizontal plane in comparison to single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with acromioclavicular cerclage. Based on the results of this biomechanical in vitro study, the use of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage with single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique may not be indicated in most cases. The effect of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage seems to be negligible, at least in presence of a double-coraco-clavicular tunnel technique reconstruction. Techniques of AC joint reconstruction should focus on the use of double coraco-clavicular tunnel devices.
PURPOSE: Horizontal instability-especially in the posterior plane-is a common problem after acromioclavicular joint injuries. The purpose was to compare the stability of a single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique and a double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique for coraco-clavicular ligament reconstruction and to examine the influence of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage on the horizontal stability in the acromioclavicular joint. METHODS: 21 acromioclavicular joints of human cadaveric shoulders were randomly assigned to the following groups: single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with horizontal augmented acromioclavicular cerclage (SCT + AC); double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique (DCT); double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique and acromioclavicular cerclage (DCT + AC). The specimens underwent cyclic horizontal testing and were recorded using a 3D optical measuring system. RESULTS: The displacement and the increase in displacement in relation to the displacement after precondition for SCT + AC were significantly higher after every measured amount of cycles than for DCT (p10 = 0.0023; p5000 = 0.0012) and DCT + AC (p10 = 0.0006; p5000 = 0.0012). There was no significant difference in the total displacement, or in the increase in total displacement between double coraco-clavicular tunnel reconstructed groups with and without additional acromioclavicular cerclage. CONCLUSION: Double coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with and without additional acromioclavicular cerclage results in a significant higher stability regarding the horizontal plane in comparison to single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique with acromioclavicular cerclage. Based on the results of this biomechanical in vitro study, the use of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage with single coraco-clavicular tunnel technique may not be indicated in most cases. The effect of an additional acromioclavicular cerclage seems to be negligible, at least in presence of a double-coraco-clavicular tunnel technique reconstruction. Techniques of AC joint reconstruction should focus on the use of double coraco-clavicular tunnel devices.
Authors: Marc S Kowalsky; Ian J Kremenic; Karl F Orishimo; Malachy P McHugh; Stephen J Nicholas; Steven J Lee Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-08-10 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Knut Beitzel; Elifho Obopilwe; David M Chowaniec; Genghis E Niver; Michael D Nowak; Bryan T Hanypsiak; James J Guerra; Robert A Arciero; Augustus D Mazzocca Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2011-08-12 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Theodorakys Marín Fermín; Jean Michel Hovsepian; Víctor Miguel Rodrigues Fernandes; Ioannis Terzidis; Emmanouil Papakostas; Jason Koh Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-02-24