Eponymous terms in acromioclavicular joint surgery.

Eponymization serves as a means of paying tribute to individuals who have made significant contributions to our culture. Each eponym is often linked with a story for everyone to discover. To aid in the retention of these stories, this review offers readers an overview of the individuals behind the eponymous terms, as well as their original descriptions, within the context of acromioclavicular joint pathology and orthopaedic surgery.

Treatment of acromioclavicular dislocations with a concomitant coracoid fracture: a systematic review of 37 patients.

Background: Acromioclavicular (AC) dislocations with a concomitant fracture of the coracoid process (CP) are rare and there is ambiguity on treatment options. This systematic review was performed to address the clinically relevant question: what are the shoulder functions, union rates, and expected time until return to daily life in patients with a dislocation of the AC joint with a concomitant CP fracture after (1) nonsurgical treatment, (2) sole fixation of the AC joint, and (3) fixation of both the AC joint and the coracoid process? Methods: Studies were identified by conducting an online. Thirty records met the inclusion criteria and were suitable for data extraction. Results: A total of 37 shoulders from 37 patients were included. Surgical treatment was provided to 22 out of 37 patients, and 15 patients had nonsurgical treatment. Out of the surgically treated patients, 12 patients were treated with a fixation of both the AC joint and the CP, 9 patients with a sole fixation of the AC joint, and 1 patient with a sole fixation of the CP. Conclusion: Existing literature does not indicate that one treatment option is superior, and more data are needed to guide evidence-based decisions on this rare injury.

Management of Acromioclavicular Injuries - Current Concepts.

Introduction: Treatment of a patient with acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injury remains challenging for orthopedic surgeons. To date, there is debate over the optimal management of ACJ injuries. This review provides an overview of assessment, treatment, and future perspectives for the treatment of and research into ACJ. Material and Methods: A scoping literature review was performed. The search was built including the following terms: acromioclavicular joint injuries or dislocation, and pathophysiology, etiology, anatomy, treatment, and trauma mechanism. The papers with evidence levels 1-3 were included in the current narrative review. Results: A total of 2242 potential relevant studies were identified in the searches. After removal of duplicates, 432 studies were screened on their titles and abstracts, resulting in 35 studies being included in the review, based on the eligibility criteria. Conclusion: The management of acute and chronic ACJ injuries is not clarified in the current literature. However, there is currently insufficient high-level evidence for the overall treatment options for ACJ injuries. If surgical intervention is decided upon in consultation with the patient, the complications may not outweigh the benefits. The multitude of existing techniques is indicative of the uncertainty surrounding this issue, and no gold standard has yet been established for treatment methods. An ideal classification would include not only vertical and horizontal instability, but also the severity of kinematic alterations of the shoulder complex. This indicates the need for a new and improved diagnostic tool for the classification of ACJ injuries.

Review of Weaver and Dunn on treatment of acromioclavicular injuries, especially complete acromioclavicular separation.

This classic discusses the original publication "Treatment of acromioclavicular injuries, especially complete acromioclavicular separation" by Weaver and Dunn, which collaborated to develop a technique for acromioclavicular joint reconstruction in 1972. Their surgical technique described resection of 2 cm of the distal clavicle and transfer of the acromial end of the coracoacromial ligament into the medullary canal of the distal clavicle. (modified) Weaver-Dunn procedures have been regarded as one of the most effective techniques to treat complete acromioclavicular joint dislocation for a long time. However, anatomic reconstructions have taken over this position since recent biomechanical studies have demonstrated superior results. Although the Weaver-Dunn procedure has fallen out of favour, it remains of historical significance. For this reason, this review will comprise the historical overview of the Weaver-Dunn procedure, the men behind the eponym and the clinical implication then and now.

Long-term Outcome After Nonoperative Treatment for Rockwood I and II Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries.

BACKGROUND: Rockwood I and II acromioclavicular joint injuries are generally treated nonoperatively. The long-term outcome is considered to be good but has not yet been properly investigated. PURPOSE: To assess the long-term outcome after nonoperative therapy for Rockwood I and II acromioclavicular joint injuries regarding functional and radiologic outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Eligible patients visited the emergency department between January 2003 and December 2015 and were ≥16 years old at the time of presentation. The main study parameters were the Constant score, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and the Simple Shoulder Test. The Constant score was measured in the injured and contralateral shoulders. Radiologic outcomes in both shoulders included joint displacement, joint space, degenerative changes, osteolysis of the distal clavicle, and ossification of the ligaments. RESULTS: A total of 75 patients were included for follow-up. After a median follow-up of 85 months (interquartile range [IQR], 68.0-100.0), the mean Constant score in the injured shoulder for the total sample was 88.6 (SD, 12.7) as compared with 93.3 (SD, 8.7) in the contralateral shoulder, with a significant difference of 4.7 points between shoulders. The median Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 4.2 (IQR, 0.0-10.8), and the median Simple Shoulder Test was 100 (IQR, 91.7-100.0). The median patient satisfaction for the injured shoulder was 83 (IQR, 70.0-95.0). Regarding radiologic outcomes, for the injured shoulder versus the contralateral shoulder, patients had similar rates of degeneration (44% vs 46%) but more frequent osteolysis of the distal clavicle (31% vs 0%), ossification of the ligaments (29% vs 7%), and deformity of the distal clavicle (19% vs 0%). CONCLUSION: Despite the frequent occurrence of radiographic changes, long-term functional outcome after Rockwood I and II acromioclavicular joint injuries is good, with only clinically nonrelevant functional differences between the injured and contralateral shoulders.