Evaluation of the Surgical Treatment for Chronic Acromioclavicular Joint Injury; Weaver and Dunn Method Versus Acromial Bone Block Transfer

2010 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-216
Author(s):  
Jin-Young Park ◽  
Seung-Wan Kang ◽  
Sang-Hoon Lhee ◽  
Jung-Bae Seo ◽  
Seung-Jun Lee
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Bone Block ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury ◽  
Block Transfer

scholarly journals Treatment of Rockwood Type III Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-55
Author(s):  
Seong Hun Kim ◽  
Kyoung Hwan Koh
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Conservative Treatment ◽  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Type Iii ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury ◽  
Rockwood Type Iii

While non-operative treatment with structured rehabilitation tends to be the strategy of choice in the management of Rockwood type III acromioclavicular joint injury, some advocate surgical treatment to prevent persistent pain, disability, and prominence of the distal clavicle. There is no clear consensus regarding when the surgical treatment should be indicated, and successful clinical outcomes have been reported for non-operative treatment in more than 80% of type III acromioclavicular joint injuries. Furthermore, there is no gold standard procedure for operative treatment of type III acromioclavicular joint injury, and more than 60 different procedures have been used for this purpose in clinical practice. Among these surgical techniques, recently introduced arthroscopic-assisted procedures involving a coracoclavicular suspension device are minimally invasive and have been shown to achieve successful coracoclavicular reconstruction in 80% of patients with failed conservative treatment. Taken together, currently available data indicate that successful treatment can be expected with initial conservative treatment in more than 96% of type III acromioclavicular injuries, whereas minimally invasive surgical treatments can be considered for unstable type IIIB injuries, especially in young and active patients. Further studies are needed to clarify the optimal treatment approach in patients with higher functional needs, especially in high-level athletes.

scholarly journals BIOMECHANICAL COMPARATIVE STUDY BETWEEN TENSION BAND WIRING, DOUBLE ENDO BUTTON AND HOOK PLATE FOR ACROMIOCLAVICULAR JOINT INJURY

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Erwin Ramawan ◽  
Jifaldi Afrian MDS
Keyword(s):  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Scientific Basis ◽  
Tension Band ◽  
Tension Band Wiring ◽  
Hook Plate ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Joint Reconstruction ◽  
Ac Joint Reconstruction ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury

Background: The treatment for acromioclavicular joint injury are debatable, there are fixation options include tension band wiring, AC joint reconstruction and hook plate These fixations are capable of providing a stable fixation, but controversy still exists that mentions the superiority of each of these fixationsPurpose: To compare biomechanical stability of 3 fixation include tension band wiring, double endo button, and hook plate to provide a scientific basis of the fixation.Methods: This research is an experimental in vitro. Using 27 acromioclavicular joints cadaver divided into three groups that performed tension band wiring fixation, double endo button and hook plate. Each fixation evaluated with 10, 20, 50 and 100 times repetitions with 100N traction force.Results: Tension band wiring gives the smallest displacement. In 10 times repetition average displacement of tension band wiring 0.056 mm (p = 0.000) compared to double endo button 1.622 mm and hook plate 0.867 mm. In 20 times repetitions, tension band wiring 0.1667 mm (p = 0,000) compared to double endo button 3.1778 mm and hook plate 1.1111 mm. In 50 times repetition, tension band wiring 0.3111 mm (p = 0.000) with double endo button 4.7778 mm and hook plate 1.3556 mm. In 100 times repetitions, tension band wire 0.556 mm (p = 0.000) while double endo button 5.4444 mm and hook plate 1.4556 mm.Conclusion: Tension band wiring have a good stability compared to double endo button and hook plate. But all of fixation provide stability for acriomioclavicular joint motion.

Functional Outcome of Acromioclavicular Joint Injury in Polytrauma Patients

1998 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen H. Gallay ◽  
Thomas M. Hupel ◽  
Dorcas E. Beaton ◽  
Emil H. Schemitsch ◽  
Michael D. McKee
Keyword(s):  
Functional Outcome ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Polytrauma Patients ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury

scholarly journals Operative Treatment of Distal Clavicle Fracture with Acromioclavicular Joint Injury

2011 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-66
Author(s):  
Ho-Jung Kang ◽  
Il-Hyun Koh ◽  
Jong-Hwan Joo ◽  
Yong-Min Chun ◽  
Hyung-Sik Kim
Keyword(s):  
Operative Treatment ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Clavicle Fracture ◽  
Distal Clavicle ◽  
Distal Clavicle Fracture ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury

A 18-Year-Old Male Thrower with Acromioclavicular Joint Injury

2019 ◽  
pp. 201-218
Author(s):  
Sheeba M. Joseph ◽  
Colin Uyeki ◽  
Jeremiah D. Johnson ◽  
Jessica Divenere ◽  
Augustus D. Mazzocca
Keyword(s):  
Acromioclavicular Joint ◽  
Joint Injury ◽  
Acromioclavicular Joint Injury
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document