Open Versus Arthroscopic Distal Clavicle Resection

Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA.
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.19). 05/2010; 26(5):697-704. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.12.007
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The purpose of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the available literature in an attempt to compare the outcome of open versus arthroscopic distal clavicle resection in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint pathology.
From January 1966 to December 2008, Medline was searched for the following key words: "acromioclavicular joint arthritis," "acromioclavicular osteolysis," "distal clavicle excision," "acromioclavicular joint excision," "Mumford," and "clavicle." Inclusion criteria included studies that compared the outcome of open versus arthroscopic distal clavicle resection. Studies that could not be translated into the English language or were not published in a peer-reviewed journal were excluded. Data were abstracted from the studies, including patient demographics, surgical procedure, rehabilitation, strength, range of motion, and clinical scoring system.
Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria, including 2 Level II studies, 1 Level III and 14 Level IV studies. Arthroscopic distal clavicle excision results in more "good" or "excellent" outcomes compared with the open procedure. Both arthroscopic techniques result in success rates in excess of 90%, with the direct procedure permitting a quicker return to athletic activities. Performing distal clavicle excision in conjunction with either subacromial decompression or rotator cuff repair also has a high degree of success. A trend toward more "poor" results is seen when distal clavicle excision is performed in patients with post-traumatic acromioclavicular instability or in Workers' Compensation patients.
Our analysis suggests that among patients undergoing distal clavicle excision for acromioclavicular joint pathology, those having an arthroscopic procedure, specifically through the direct approach, can expect a faster return to activities while obtaining similar long-term outcomes compared with the open procedure.
Level III, systematic review.

Download full-text


Available from: Bernard R Bach, Aug 28, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Osteoarthritis is one of the most common causes of pain originating from the acromioclavicular (AC) joint. An awareness of appropriate diagnostic techniques is necessary in order to localize clinical symptoms to the AC joint. Initial treatments for AC joint osteoarthritis, which include non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) and corticosteroids, are recommended prior to surgical interventions. Distal clavicle excision, the main surgical treatment option, can be performed by various surgical approaches, such as open procedures, direct arthroscopic, and indirect arthroscopic techniques. When choosing the best surgical option, factors such as avoidance of AC ligament damage, clavicular instability, and post-operative pain must be considered. This article examines patient selection, complications, and outcomes of surgical treatment options for AC joint osteoarthritis.
    Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 07/2008; 1(2):154-60. DOI:10.1007/s12178-008-9024-5
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Excision of the distal clavicle (DCE) is a commonly carried out surgical procedure used in the management of acromioclavicular joint pathology. Although successful outcomes after both open and arthroscopic distal clavicle excision occur in a high percentage of patients, treatment failures have been reported, creating a difficult clinical scenario for the treating orthopedic surgeon. The most common mode of failure after DCE is persistent pain and potential etiologies include under-resection, over-resection leading to joint instability, postoperative stiffness, heterotopic ossification, untreated concomitant shoulder pathology, and postoperative infection. Less common causes of failure include distal clavicle fracture, reossification or fusion across the acromioclavicular joint, suprascapular neuropathy, and psychiatric illness. Persistent symptoms and disability after distal clavicle excision require a careful assessment of these potential causes of treatment failure and the formulation of a treatment plan, which may include conservative care, revision surgery, or coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction. Although careful patient selection, preoperative planning, proper surgical technique, and appropriate rehabilitation during the index procedure can minimize the likelihood of poor outcome, this paper reviews the work-up and management of cases of failed distal clavicle excision.
    Sports medicine and arthroscopy review 09/2010; 18(3):213-9. DOI:10.1097/JSA.0b013e3181e892da · 1.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The incidence of arthroscopic subacromial decompression has been increasing over the last few years. Little is known about the duration of sick leave after such a procedure. The aim of this study was to determine the time till return to full duty and to explore the various influencing factors. We retrospectively evaluated a group of 166 patients who consecutively underwent arthroscopic subacromial decompression for subacromial impingement syndrome. One hundred patients were professionally active at the time of surgery; the mean duration till return to full duty was 11.1 weeks. Self-employed workers had the shortest sick leave period (median time of 1 week). No statistically significant difference was seen between the group with a financial compensation from the national health insurance system (median time of 12 weeks) and the group with income replacement by a private insurance company (median time of 8 weeks). Patients performing manual labour typically had a longer period of sick leave than other employees (12 versus 8 weeks). A longer absence from work was also observed in individuals who underwent a concomitant arthroscopic AC resection and patients with a higher BMI.
    Acta orthopaedica Belgica 12/2011; 77(6):737-42. · 0.57 Impact Factor
Show more