Literature DB >> 33108527

Anatomic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments with semitendinosus tendon graft for the treatment of chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocation provides good clinical and radiological results.

Maristella F Saccomanno1, Giacomo Marchi2, Fabrizio Mocini3, Valeria Vismara3, Vincenzo Campana3, Andrea G Salvi4, Alessandra Scaini4, Giuseppe Milano4,2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes of anatomical reconstruction of the coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments with single-strand semitendinosus tendon graft for the treatment of chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocation.
METHODS: Patients affected by chronic type III-V acromioclavicular joint dislocations were included. Exclusion criteria were: age under 18 years, concomitant rotator cuff tears, previous surgery to the same shoulder, degenerative changes of the glenohumeral joint, infections, neurologic diseases, patients with a previous history of ligament reconstruction procedures that had required harvesting of the semitendinosus tendon from the ipsilateral or contralateral knee. All patients underwent the same surgical technique and rehabilitation. Primary outcome was the normalized Constant score. Secondary outcomes were: DASH score, radiographic evaluation of loss of reduction and acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis.
RESULTS: Thirty patients with a mean age of 28.9 ± 8.3 years were included. Mean time to surgery was 12.8 ± 10 months. Mean follow-up was 28.1 ± 2.4 months (range: 24-32). Comparison between pre- and postoperative functional scores showed significant clinical improvement (p < 0.001). Time to surgery was independently associated with a poorer Constant score (p < 0.0001). On radiographs, 4 patients (13.3%) showed asymptomatic partial loss of reduction.
CONCLUSION: Anatomic reconstruction of coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligaments using a semitendinosus tendon graft for the treatment of chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocation provided good clinical and radiological results at minimum 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Acromioclavicular; Acromioclavicular ligament; Autograft; Coracoclavicular ligament; Dislocation; Instability; Reconstruction; Semitendinosus

Year:  2020        PMID: 33108527     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-020-06285-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  33 in total

1.  G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.

Authors:  Franz Faul; Edgar Erdfelder; Albert-Georg Lang; Axel Buchner
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2007-05

Review 2.  Acromioclavicular joint injuries in overhead athletes: a concise review of injury mechanisms, treatment options, and outcomes.

Authors:  Christopher F Deans; Joseph M Gentile; Matthew A Tao
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2019-06

3.  A biomechanical analysis of scapular rotation during arm abduction in the scapular plane.

Authors:  S D Bagg; W J Forrest
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 2.159

4.  Surgical management of chronic high-grade acromioclavicular joint dislocations: a systematic review.

Authors:  Paul Borbas; James Churchill; Eugene T Ek
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2019-07-23       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  The anatomic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction: surgical technique and indications.

Authors:  Brad C Carofino; Augustus D Mazzocca
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  A validation of the Nottingham Clavicle Score: a clavicle, acromioclavicular joint and sternoclavicular joint-specific patient-reported outcome measure.

Authors:  Edmund R Charles; Vinod Kumar; James Blacknall; Kimberley Edwards; John M Geoghegan; Paul A Manning; W Angus Wallace
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.019

7.  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

8.  Minimal Clinically Important Difference of Shoulder Outcome Measures and Diagnoses: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Dominique I Dabija; Nitin B Jain
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.159

9.  Establishing clinically significant outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Authors:  Gregory L Cvetanovich; Anirudh K Gowd; Joseph N Liu; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Brandon C Cabarcas; Brian J Cole; Brian Forsythe; Anthony A Romeo; Nikhil N Verma
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2019-01-24       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 10.  Radiographic evaluation of the acromioclavicular and sternoclavicular joints.

Authors:  Lauren A Ernberg; Hollis G Potter
Journal:  Clin Sports Med       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.182

View more
  2 in total

1.  Evolving concepts and consensus in challenging shoulder problems: a European perspective.

Authors:  Giuseppe Milano; Frank Martetschläger; Ladislav Kovačič
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Arthroscopic Coracoclavicular Reconstruction Combined with Open Acromioclavicular Reconstruction Using Knot Hiding Clavicular Implants Is a Stable Solution.

Authors:  Juha O Ranne; Severi O Salonen; Terho U Kainonen; Jussi A Kosola; Lasse L Lempainen; Mika T Siitonen; Pekka T Niemi
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-08-27
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.