Acute acromioclavicular dislocation: hook plate vs. coracoclavicular sutures

Authors

  • Andrés Arismendi-Montoya Orthopedist and Traumatologist. Shoulder and Elbow Clinic
  • Juan Carlos Jaramillo-Fernández Orthopedist and Traumatologist. Shoulder and Elbow Clinic, HPTU, Clínica del Campestre. Head of the Orthopedics and Traumatology Department, HPTU, Medellín, Colombia.
  • Felipe Fernández-Lopera Orthopedist and Traumatologist, HPTU, Medellín, Colombia.
  • Alejandro Vallejo-Díaz Fourth-year resident in Orthopedics and Traumatology, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín, Colombia.
  • Andrés Alfonso Arango-Mejía Residente de IV año de Ortopedia y Traumatología, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín, Colombia.

Keywords:

Acromioclavicular Joint, Shoulder Dislocation, Orthopedic Fixation Devices, Reconstructive Surgical Procedures, Suture Techniques

Abstract

Introduction: There is actually no consensus on the ideal surgical treatment of acute acromioclavicular dislocations. The use of the hook plate and suture anchors are both therapeutic options in the aim of achieving acromioclavicular joint reduction and healing. That is why this study wants to approach which technique is better on regards the recurrence and function.

Methods: A clinical trial was performed including 36 patients diagnosed with acute acromioclavicular dislocations grades III to V according to the Rockwood classification between September 2008 and February 2011 in Hospital Pablo Tobón Uribe, Medellín, Colombia. Patients were randomized in two surgical groups: one group treated with direct acromioclavicular reduction using a hook plate and another group with coracoclavicular suture anchors.

Results: 36 patients were included and randomized in two surgically treated groups for patients with acute acromioclavicular dislocation. A total of 19 (52.8 %) patients were treated with coracoclavicular reconstruction using suture anchors and the second group of 17 (47.2%) patients were treated with direct acromioclavicular reduction using a hook plate. Grade IV dislocation according to the Rockwood classification was the most frequently diagnosed (47.2%) followed by grade III (41.7%). We were forced to suspend patient recruitment due to the recurrence rate (52.6% for the suture anchor group and 23.5% for the hook plate group). Constant score was similar for both groups independent of recurrence.

Discussion: Based on data obtained it can be concluded that the coracoclavicular suture anchor technique has a higher recurrence rate than the direct acromioclavicular reduction technique using a hook plate. Another study should be completed in order to identify an explanation for the high recurrence rate with the coracoclavicular suture anchor technique.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Fukuda K, Craig EV, An KN, Cofield RH, Chao EY. Biomechanical study of the ligamentous system of the acromioclavicular joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986; 68(3): 434-40.

Tossy JD, Mead MC, Sigmond HM. Acromioclavicular separations: useful and practical classification for treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1963; 28: 111-19.

Bosworth BM. Acromioclavicular separation: new method of repair. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1941; 73: 866-71.

Ammon JT, Voor MJ, Tillett ED. A biomechanical comparison of Bosworth and poly-L lactic acid bioabsorbable screws for treatment of acromioclavicular separations. Arthroscopy 2005; 21: 1443-6.

Nuber GW, Bowen MK. Acromioclavicular joint injuries and distal clavicle fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1997; 5: 11-8.

Breslow MJ, Jazrawi LM, Bernstein AD. Treatment of acromioclavicular joint separation: suture or suture anchors. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002; 11: 225-9.

Goble EM, Somers WK, Clark R. The development of suture anchors for use in soft tissue fixation to bone. Am J Sports Med 1994; 22:236-40.

Bannister GC, Wallace WA, Stableforth PG, Hutson MA. The management of acute acromioclavicular dislocation. A randomised prospective controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989; 71(5): 848-50.

Hedtmann A, Fett H, Ludwig J. Management of old neglected posttraumatic acromioclavicular joint instability and arthrosis. Orthopade 1998; 27(8): 556-66.

Larsen E, Bjerg-Nielsen A, Christensen P. Conservative or surgical treatment of acromioclavicular dislocation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986; 68: 552-5.

Sim E, Schwarz N, Höcker K, Berzlanovich A. Repair of complete acromioclavicular separations using the acromioclavicular-hook plate. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1995; 314: 134-42.

Habernak H, Schmid L,Walch G. Management of acromioclavicular joint dislocation with the Wolter hook-plate. One year follow-up of 35 cases. Unfallchirurgie 1993; 19: 33-9.

Habernak H, Weinstabl R, Schmid L. A crook plate for treatment of acromioclavicular joint separation: indication, technique, and results after one year. J Trauma 1993; 35: 893-901.

Faraj AA, Ketzer B. The use of a hook plate in the management of acromioclavicular injuries: report of ten cases. Acta Orthop Belg 2001; 67: 448-51.

Henkel T, Oetiker R, Hackenbruch W. Treatment of fresh Tossy III acromion- clavicular joint dislocation by ligament suture and temporary fixation with the clavicular hooked plate. Swiss Surg 1997; 3(4): 160-6.

McConell AJ, Yoo DJ, Zdero R, Schemitsch EH, McKee MD. Methods of operative fixation of the acromio-clavicular joint: a biomechanical comparison. J Orthop Trauma 2007; 21: 248-53.

Di Francesco A, Zoccali C, Colafarina O, Pizzoferrato R. The use of hook plate in type III and V acromio-clavicular Rockwood dislocations: Clinical and radiological midterm results and MRI evaluation in 42 patients. Injury 2011; 16. En prensa.

Hessmann M, Gotzen L, Gehling H, Richter A. Reconstruction of complete acromioclavicular separations (Tossy III) using PDS banding as augmentation: experience in 64 cases. Acta Chir Belg 1995; 95:147-51.

Morrison DS, Lemos MJ. Acromioclavicular separation. Reconstruction using synthetic loop augmentation. Am J Sports Med 1995; 23:105-10.

De Tullio V, Orsi R, Celenza M. Surgical treatment of Allman type III acromio-clavicular dislocation. A long-term follow-up study. Acta Orthop Belg 1994; 60: 300-2.

Wolf EM, Fragomen AT. Arthroscopic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments for acromioclavicular joint separations. Oper Tech Sports Med 2004; 12: 49-55.

Mazzocca AD, Santangelo SA, Johnson ST, Rios CG, Dumonski ML, Arciero RA. A biomechanical evaluation of an anatomical coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 2006;34: 236-46.

Published

2011-12-01

How to Cite

1.
Arismendi-Montoya A, Jaramillo-Fernández JC, Fernández-Lopera F, Vallejo-Díaz A, Arango-Mejía AA. Acute acromioclavicular dislocation: hook plate vs. coracoclavicular sutures. Rev. Colomb. Ortop. Traumatol. [Internet]. 2011 Dec. 1 [cited 2026 Mar. 16];25(4):337-44. Available from: https://revistasccotorg.biteca.online/index.php/rccot/article/view/729

Issue

Section

Original research
Article metrics
Abstract views
Galley vies
PDF Views
HTML views
Other views
Escanea para compartir
QR Code

Some similar items: