Clinical and radiographic outcome after acromioclavicular reconstruction: a single-center comparison of three different techniques.

Abstract

This prospective, observational cohort study compares the clinical and radiographic outcomes of the modified Weaver and Dunn (WD) technique with the newer, anatomical double-button plus tendon allograft technique (DB), and the suture anchor repair plus tendon allograft (SA). The study cohort includes 53 patients, who underwent surgery for acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation Rockwood type 3, 4 and 5. Patient-reported outcome scores and clinical results, including Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Constant score (CS) results as well as loss of reduction rates on plain radiographs were compared. Nineteen patients in the DB group, 19 patients in the SA group and 15 patients in the WD group were included. Average time of follow up was 5 years. The mean VAS scores (SD) were 0.3 (0.6), 0.5 (0.8) and 1.2 (1.4) in the WD, DB and SA groups (p=0.06). There were no significant differences in DASH, SSV and Constant scores between groups. Loss of reduction on plain radiographs occurred in 4 patients in total (1 WD, 1 DB, 2 SA). The SSV score, the DASH score, the Constant score and the VAS-score revealed no statistically significant differences between the group with good alignment compared to groups with partial reduction or loss of reduction. In conclusion we can state that the use of anatomical reconstruction techniques with tendon allograft and additional button or suture anchors fixation does not affect the clinical and radiographical outcomes compared to the classic Weaver and Dunn procedure. Loss of reduction was not correlated to worse clinical outcome scores.