Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison between two double-button endoscopically assisted surgical techniques for the treatment acute acromioclavicular dislocations

  • Original Article
  • Published:
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare clinical and radiological outcomes between two endoscopically assisted double-button techniques in high-grade acute acromioclavicular separations.

Methods

A retrospective single-center study was conducted in patients with acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation Rockwood types III and V, from 2009 to 2014. All were treated endoscopically, with a 1-year minimum follow-up. Two consecutive series were conducted; the first (TR group) received the TightRope® system, whereas last series (DB group) was treated with the Dog Bone® button technology (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA). Primary endpoints were last follow-up values of Constant score (CS) and Quick-DASH (QD) score. Moreover, the posttraumatic displacement and its evolution were assessed on bilateral Zanca radiographs. A displacement of 5 mm or greater the day after surgery was considered as a lack of reduction; the same difference on last follow-up X-rays was considered as a loss of reduction.

Results

Forty patients were reviewed: 22 in the TR group and 18 in the DB group. After a mean follow-up of 27.7 ± 8.3 months, CS and QD averaged, respectively, 94.3 ± 4.4 and 2.0 ± 2.6 in the TR series, whereas they averaged, respectively, 95 ± 6.1 and 3.4 ± 3.3 in the DB series after a mean follow-up of 24.1 ± 5 months (PCS = 0.16, PQDS = 0.08). Lack of reduction and loss of reduction rates were significantly higher in the DB group, with P = 0.0005 and P < 0.0001, respectively.

Conclusions

Both techniques provided good to excellent functional outcomes. However, considering inferior radiological results using the Dog Bone® device, we would prefer the TightRope® device in acute acromioclavicular dislocations.

Level of evidence

IV: Therapeutic study—cases series.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Beitzel K, Cote MP, Apostolakos J et al (2013) Current concepts in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy 29:387–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rockwood CA (1984) Injuries to the acromioclavicular joint. In: Rockwood CA, Green DP (eds) Fractures in adults, vol 1, 2nd edn. JB Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 860–910

    Google Scholar 

  3. Tauber M (2013) Management of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocations: current concepts. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133:985–995

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Korsten K, Gunning AC, Leenen LP (2014) Operative or conservative treatment in patients with Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: a systematic review and update of current literature. Int Orthop 38:831–838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Epstein D, Day M, Rokito A (2012) Current concepts in the surgical management of acromioclavicular joint injuries. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis 70:11–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jari R, Costic RS, Rodosky MW, Debski RE (2004) Biomechanical function of surgical procedures for acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy 20:237–245

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wellmann M, Zantop T, Weimenn A, Raschke MJ, Petersen W (2007) Biomechanical evaluation of minimally invasive repairs for complete acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Am J Sports Med 35:955–961

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Walz L, Salzmann GM, Fabbro T, Eichhorn S, Imhoff AB (2008) The anatomic reconstruction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations using 2 TightRope devices: a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med 36:2398–2406

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Beitzel K, Obopilwe E, Apostolakos J et al (2014) Rotational and translational stability of different methods for direct acromioclavicular ligament repair in anatomic acromioclavicular joint reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 42:2141–2148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Barth J, Duparc F, Andrieu K et al (2015) French Society of Arthroscopy. Is coracoclavicular stabilisation alone sufficient for the endoscopic treatment of severe acromioclavicular joint dislocation (Rockwood types III, IV, and V)? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 101:S297–S303

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Gstettner C, Tauber M, Hitzl W, Resch H (2008) Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17:220–225

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Horst K, Garving C, Thometzki T et al (2016) Comparative study on the treatment of Rockwood type III acute acromioclavicular dislocation: clinical results from the TightRope® technique vs. K-wire fixation. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res pii:S1877-0568(16)30229-8

    Google Scholar 

  13. Darabos N, Gusic N, Darabos A, Bakota B, Miklic D (2015) Is AC TightRope fixation better than Bosworth screw fixation for minimally invasive operative treatment of Rockwood III AC joint injury? Injury 46:S113–S118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Salzmann GM, Walz L, Buchmann S, Glabgly P, Venjakob A, Imhoff AB (2010) Arthroscopically assisted 2-bundle anatomical reduction of acute acromioclavicular joint separations. Am J Sports Med 38:1179–1187

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosslenbroich SB, Schliemann B, Schneider KN et al (2015) Minimally invasive coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction with a flip-button technique (MINAR): clinical and radiological midterm results. Am J Sports Med 43:1751–1757

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nascimento AT, Claudio GK (2016) Functional and radiological evaluation of acute acromioclavicular dislocation treated with anchors without eyelet: comparison with other techniques. Rev Bras Orthop 51:561–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lu D, Wang T, Chen H, Sun LJ (2016) A comparison of double Endobutton and triple Endobutton techniques for acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102:891–895

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Faggiani M, Vasario GP, Mattei L, Calò MJ, Castoldi F (2016) Comparing mini-open and arthroscopic acromioclavicular joint repair: functional results and return to sport. Musculoskelet Surg 100:187–191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Cano-Martinez JA, Nicolas-Serrano G, Bento-Gerard J, Picazo-Marin F, Andrés-Grau J (2016) Acute high-grade acromioclavicular dislocations treated with triple button device (MINAR): preliminary results. Injury 47:2512–2519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Arthrex Incorporation. TightRope® technique [Arthrex Inc. web site]. https://www.arthrex.com/shoulder/ac-tightrope-technique. Accessed 1 Jan 2017

  21. Arthrex Incorporation. Dog Bone® Button [Arthrex Inc. web site]. https://www.arthrex.com/shoulder/dog-bone-button. Accessed 1 Jan 2017

  22. Beris A, Lykissas M, Kostas-Agnantis I, Vekris M, Mitsionis G, Korompilias A (2013) Management of acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation with a double-button fixation system. Injury 44:288–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kraus N, Haas NP, Scheibel M, Gerhardt C (2013) Arthroscopically assisted stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations in a coracoclavicular Double-TightRope technique: V-shaped versus parallel drill hole orientation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133:1431–1440

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Venjakob AJ, Salzmann GM, Gabel F et al (2013) Arthroscopically assisted 2-bundle anatomic reduction of acute acromioclavicular joint separations: 58-month findings. Am J Sports Med 41:615–621

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jensen G, Katthagen JC, Alvarado LE, Lill H, Voigt C (2014) Has the arthroscopically assisted reduction of acute AC joint separations with the double tight-rope technique advantages over the clavicular hook plate fixation? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:422–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Glanzmann MC, Buchmann S, Audigé L, Kolling C, Flury M (2013) Clinical and radiographical results after double flip button stabilization of acute grade III and IV acromioclavicular joint separations. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133:1699–1707

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Scheibel M, Dröschel S, Gerhardt C, Kraus N (2011) Arthroscopically assisted stabilization of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint separations. Am J Sports Med 39:1507–1516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Brady P. The Dog Bone Technique for AC joint reconstruction. [Arthrex Inc. web site]. https://www.arthrex.com/resources/presentation/30it8OU_y0WLIgFXviksA/the-dog-bone-technique-for-ac-joint-reconstruction. Accessed 1 Jan 2017

  29. Türker M, Kiliçoglu O, Salduz A, Bozdag E, Sünbüloglu E (2011) Loop security and tensile properties of polyblend and traditional suture materials. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:296–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Motta P, Maderni A, Bruno L, Mariotti U (2011) Suture rupture in acromioclavicular joint dislocations treated with flip buttons. Arthroscopy 27:294–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mazzocca AD, Santangelo SA, Johnson ST, Rios CG, Dumonski ML, Arciero RA (2006) A biomechanical evaluation of an anatomical coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 34:236–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology – Service of Hand, Upper Limb and Peripheral Nerve Surgery - Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris, Georges Pompidou European Hospital (HEGP), Paris Descartes University, 20 Rue Leblanc, 75015, Paris, France

    P. Vulliet & M. Le Hanneur

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris, Bichat – Claude Bernard Hospital, Paris Diderot University, 46 Rue Henri Huchard, 75018, Paris, France

    V. Cladiere & P. Boyer

  3. Clinique des Lilas, 41-49 Avenue du Maréchal Juin, 93260, Les Lilas, France

    P. Loriaut

Authors
  1. P. Vulliet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Le Hanneur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Cladiere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Loriaut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. Boyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Vulliet.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interests. None of them has a financial interest in any of the products, devices or drugs mentioned in this manuscript. They have not received or will receive any financial aid, in any form, for this study, from any of the following organizations: National Institutes of Health (NIH); Wellcome Trust; Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI); or other(s).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vulliet, P., Le Hanneur, M., Cladiere, V. et al. A comparison between two double-button endoscopically assisted surgical techniques for the treatment acute acromioclavicular dislocations. Musculoskelet Surg 102, 73–79 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0501-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0501-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation