PURPOSE: To systematically review the outcomes of surgical treatments of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. METHODS: Studies were identified by electronic databases (Ovid, PubMed). All studies reporting functional and radiological outcomes of surgical treatments of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations were included. Following data were extracted: authors and year, study design, level of evidence, number of patients, age, classification of acromioclavicular joint dislocation, time to surgery, surgical technique, follow-up, clinical and imaging outcomes, complications, and failures. Descriptive statistics was used, when a data pooling was not possible. Comparable outcomes were pooled to generate summary outcomes reported as frequency-weighted values. Quality appraisal was assessed through the MINORS checklist. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-three studies were included for a total of 4473 shoulders. Mean age of participants was 36.9 years. Mean follow-up was 42.06 months. Arthroscopy showed better ASES (p < 0.0001) and lower VAS pain score (p = 0.0249) compared to an open approach. Biologic and synthetic reconstructions demonstrated better results over osteosynthesis techniques. Biologic techniques showed overall better Constant (p = 0.0001) and DASH (p = 0.0215) scores, while synthetic reconstruction showed better UCLA score (p = 0.0001). Among suture buttons, triple button showed overall better results in Constant (p = 0.0001) and VAS (p = 0.0001) scores, while better results in DASH score (p = 0.0003) were achieved by 2 double button techniques. Overall, the level of evidence was low. CONCLUSION: Biological and synthetic reconstructions achieved better functional scores compared to osteosynthesis. Among suture buttons, the triple button showed better functional performance. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saccomanno et al. (2020) studied this question.