Arthroscopically assisted reduction of acute acromioclavicular joint separations: comparison of clinical and radiological results of single versus double TightRope™ technique

The aim of this study was to compare the results of the single (STR) versus double TightRope™ (DTR) technique for stabilisation of acute separations of the AC joint with the hypothesis that DTR achieves lower CC distance. A total of 29 consecutive patients treated operatively with the TR technique (...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Der Unfallchirurg 2013-05, Vol.116 (5), p.442-450
Main Authors: Patzer, T, Clauss, C, Kühne, C A, Ziring, E, Efe, T, Ruchholtz, S, Mann, D
Format: Article
Language:ger
Subjects:
Acromioclavicular Joint - injuries
Acromioclavicular Joint - surgery
Acute Disease
Adolescent
Adult
Arthroscopy - instrumentation
Arthroscopy - methods
Female
Humans
Joint Dislocations - diagnosis
Joint Dislocations - surgery
Male
Middle Aged
Range of Motion, Articular
Reconstructive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation
Suture Techniques - instrumentation
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The aim of this study was to compare the results of the single (STR) versus double TightRope™ (DTR) technique for stabilisation of acute separations of the AC joint with the hypothesis that DTR achieves lower CC distance. A total of 29 consecutive patients treated operatively with the TR technique (mean age 38.1 years, n=26 male) were analysed in a cohort study with a mean follow-up of 13.3 months (12.0-21.7). Acute AC joint separations types III and V according to Rockwood (R) were included; R types I, II, IV and VI were excluded. The prospective scores determined pre-op and 3, 6 and 12 months post-op and X-rays were evaluated. Of the patients 12 suffered an R type III and 17 an R V separation; 14 were treated with STR and 15 with DTR. With STR, 8 R III and 6 R V injuries and with DTR 4 R III and 11 R V injuries were treated arthroscopically. STR achieved an increased CC distance >125% compared to the contralateral AC joint in five cases (36%). Two of them occurred as R V and three as R III injury. DTR achieved a CC distance >125% in two cases of an R V injury (13%). The DTR technique provides lower CC distance compared to the STR technique, without a significant difference of CC distance and scores.
ISSN:1433-044X
DOI:10.1007/s00113-011-2135-2