Management of Acute High‐Grade Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations: Comparable Clinical and Radiological Outcomes After Bidirectional Arthroscopic‐Assisted Stabilization With the Single Low‐Profile Suture Button Technique Versus Double‐Suture Button Technique
Larissa Eckl, Philipp Vetter, Frederik Bellmann, Jan-Philipp Imiolczyk, Philipp Moroder, Markus Scheibel
Abstract
PURPOSE: To compare the 2-year clinical and radiological outcomes of an arthroscopic-assisted bidirectional stabilization procedure using a single low-profile (LPSB) or double-suture button (DSB) technique with additional percutaneous acromioclavicular (AC) cerclage fixation for patients with acute high-grade AC joint dislocation. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared male patients aged between 18 and 56 years with acute high-grade AC joint dislocation fixed with either a LPSB or DSB technique. Patients were examined at least 24 months after surgery. Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Taft (TF), and Acromioclavicular Joint Instability (ACJI) scores were evaluated. Coracoclavicular difference, ossification, AC joint osteoarthritis, and dynamic posterior translation (DPT) were assessed on bilateral anteroposterior stress radiographs and modified Alexander views. The revision rate due to implant conflict and duration of surgery were reported. Group outcome differences were analyzed using standardized hypothesis tests. RESULTS: 28 patients aged 39.2 (LPSB) and 36.4 years (DSB) (P = .319; CI: -2.77-8.34) were eligible per cohort. The follow-up was 30.5 (LPSB) and 37.4 months (DSB) (P = .02; CI: -12.73-1.08). LPSB patients rated a significantly higher SSV (93.2% vs 81.9% [DSB]; P = .004). TF and ACJI scores were similar between the groups. Coracoclavicular difference markedly decreased from 12 mm to 3 mm for both cohorts (P < .001). Ossification was identified in over 85% in both cohorts (P = .160; CI -0.77-0.13) and osteoarthritis in 21.4% (LPSB) and 39.3% (DSB) (P = .150). Persistent DPT was found in around 30% for both cohorts (P = .561; CI -0.26-0.48). The revision rates were 0% (LPSB) and 7% (DSB) (P = .491). LPSB surgery was shorter (59.7 vs 71.5 mins [DSB]) (P = .011). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the LPSB and DSB techniques with additional percutaneous AC cerclage fixation showed comparable outcomes with excellent clinical and satisfactory radiological results. The assessment of the subjective patient satisfaction was in favor of the LPSB technique and no postoperative revision event was observed following this procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.