Both Arthroscopically Assisted Suture Button and Hook Plate Are Effective in Treating Acute High-grade Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: A Systematic Review

To conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation to determine which technique provides superior clinical benefits. Tw...

Celý popis

Uložené v:
Podrobná bibliografia
Vydané v:Arthroscopy Ročník 41; číslo 9; s. 3733
Hlavní autori: Liang, Junbo, Han, Dawei, Ying, Xiaofang, Chen, Cong, Luo, Hua
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:English
Vydavateľské údaje: United States 01.09.2025
Predmet:
ISSN:1526-3231, 1526-3231
On-line prístup:Zistit podrobnosti o prístupe
Tagy: Pridať tag
Žiadne tagy, Buďte prvý, kto otaguje tento záznam!
Abstract To conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation to determine which technique provides superior clinical benefits. Two independent researchers conducted literature searches on the basis of Preferred Reporting Items from Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies that compared AASB and HP in treating acute high-grade (grade Ⅲ and greater) ACJ dislocation. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies that compared AASB and HP for acute Rockwood type III or greater dislocations with evaluations of functional outcomes (Constant score [CS], pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand). Studies were excluded if they were case reports, reviews, or had missing data, revision procedures, or had loss to follow-up >20%. The methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed on the basis of Newcastle-Ottawa scale. In this systematic review, 14 studies with 782 participants were included, all of which were classified as Level III-IV evidence. The analysis of 12 studies showed that the AASB group (81.9-95.31) had only slightly greater postoperative CS compared with the HP group (77.5-92.38), with 9 studies reporting significant improvements, whereas 3 studies found no significant difference compared with the HP group. For pain outcomes, 4 studies showed lower pain score in the AASB group, whereas the rest found no significant difference; the visual analog scale scores ranged from 0.3 to 3.61 in the AASB group and 0.5 to 4.9 in the HP group. Operation time was generally longer in the AASB group (AASB: 48.3-89.39 minutes; HP: 40.77-76.5 minutes). Complication rates were similar (AASB: 0%-50%; HP: 0%-36.36%), with only 1 study reporting a greater incidence in the AASB group. Minimal clinically important difference analysis from 3 studies showed clinically significant improvements in CS with AASB, but no significant difference between AASB and HP for pain outcomes. AASB shows comparable outcomes to HP for acute high-grade ACJ dislocations, with similar ranges in clinical scores and complication rates. Although AASB shows some advantages in functional outcomes, the differences between the 2 methods are minimal, suggesting that both approaches are effective and safe. Level IV, systematic review of Level Ⅲ-IV studies.
AbstractList To conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation to determine which technique provides superior clinical benefits. Two independent researchers conducted literature searches on the basis of Preferred Reporting Items from Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies that compared AASB and HP in treating acute high-grade (grade Ⅲ and greater) ACJ dislocation. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies that compared AASB and HP for acute Rockwood type III or greater dislocations with evaluations of functional outcomes (Constant score [CS], pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand). Studies were excluded if they were case reports, reviews, or had missing data, revision procedures, or had loss to follow-up >20%. The methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed on the basis of Newcastle-Ottawa scale. In this systematic review, 14 studies with 782 participants were included, all of which were classified as Level III-IV evidence. The analysis of 12 studies showed that the AASB group (81.9-95.31) had only slightly greater postoperative CS compared with the HP group (77.5-92.38), with 9 studies reporting significant improvements, whereas 3 studies found no significant difference compared with the HP group. For pain outcomes, 4 studies showed lower pain score in the AASB group, whereas the rest found no significant difference; the visual analog scale scores ranged from 0.3 to 3.61 in the AASB group and 0.5 to 4.9 in the HP group. Operation time was generally longer in the AASB group (AASB: 48.3-89.39 minutes; HP: 40.77-76.5 minutes). Complication rates were similar (AASB: 0%-50%; HP: 0%-36.36%), with only 1 study reporting a greater incidence in the AASB group. Minimal clinically important difference analysis from 3 studies showed clinically significant improvements in CS with AASB, but no significant difference between AASB and HP for pain outcomes. AASB shows comparable outcomes to HP for acute high-grade ACJ dislocations, with similar ranges in clinical scores and complication rates. Although AASB shows some advantages in functional outcomes, the differences between the 2 methods are minimal, suggesting that both approaches are effective and safe. Level IV, systematic review of Level Ⅲ-IV studies.
To conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation to determine which technique provides superior clinical benefits.PURPOSETo conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the treatment of acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) dislocation to determine which technique provides superior clinical benefits.Two independent researchers conducted literature searches based on Preferred Reporting Items from Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies comparing AASB and HP in treating acute high-grade (grade Ⅲ and above) ACJ dislocation. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies comparing AASB and HP for acute Rockwood Type ≥ III dislocations with evaluations of functional outcomes (Constant score (CS), pain score, American shoulder and elbow, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand). Studies were excluded if they were case reports, reviews, or had missing data, revision procedures, or loss to follow-up >20%. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed based on Newcastle-Ottawa scale.METHODSTwo independent researchers conducted literature searches based on Preferred Reporting Items from Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies comparing AASB and HP in treating acute high-grade (grade Ⅲ and above) ACJ dislocation. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies comparing AASB and HP for acute Rockwood Type ≥ III dislocations with evaluations of functional outcomes (Constant score (CS), pain score, American shoulder and elbow, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand). Studies were excluded if they were case reports, reviews, or had missing data, revision procedures, or loss to follow-up >20%. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed based on Newcastle-Ottawa scale.In this systematic review, 14 studies with 782 participants were included, all of which were classified as level III-IV evidence. The analysis of 12 studies showed that the AASB group (81.9 to 95.31) had only slightly higher postoperative CS compared to the HP group (77.5 to 92.38), with nine studies reporting significant improvements, while three studies found no significant difference compared to the HP group. For pain outcomes, four studies showed lower pain score in the AASB group, while the rest found no significant difference; the VAS scores ranged from 0.3 to 3.61 in the AASB group and 0.5 to 4.9 in the HP group. Operation time was generally longer in the AASB group (AASB: 48.3 to 89.39 min; HP: 40.77 to 76.5 min). Complication rates were similar (AASB: 0% to 50%; HP: 0% to 36.36%), with only one study reporting a higher incidence in the AASB group. Minimal Clinically Important Difference analysis from three studies showed clinically significant improvements in CS with AASB, but no significant difference between AASB and HP for pain outcomes.RESULTSIn this systematic review, 14 studies with 782 participants were included, all of which were classified as level III-IV evidence. The analysis of 12 studies showed that the AASB group (81.9 to 95.31) had only slightly higher postoperative CS compared to the HP group (77.5 to 92.38), with nine studies reporting significant improvements, while three studies found no significant difference compared to the HP group. For pain outcomes, four studies showed lower pain score in the AASB group, while the rest found no significant difference; the VAS scores ranged from 0.3 to 3.61 in the AASB group and 0.5 to 4.9 in the HP group. Operation time was generally longer in the AASB group (AASB: 48.3 to 89.39 min; HP: 40.77 to 76.5 min). Complication rates were similar (AASB: 0% to 50%; HP: 0% to 36.36%), with only one study reporting a higher incidence in the AASB group. Minimal Clinically Important Difference analysis from three studies showed clinically significant improvements in CS with AASB, but no significant difference between AASB and HP for pain outcomes.Despite longer operation times, AASB demonstrates comparable outcomes to HP for acute high-grade ACJ dislocations, with similar ranges in clinical scores and complication rates. Although AASB shows some advantages in functional outcomes, the differences between the two methods are minimal, suggesting that both approaches are effective and safe.CONCLUSIONSDespite longer operation times, AASB demonstrates comparable outcomes to HP for acute high-grade ACJ dislocations, with similar ranges in clinical scores and complication rates. Although AASB shows some advantages in functional outcomes, the differences between the two methods are minimal, suggesting that both approaches are effective and safe.
Author Luo, Hua
Liang, Junbo
Han, Dawei
Chen, Cong
Ying, Xiaofang
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Junbo
  surname: Liang
  fullname: Liang, Junbo
  organization: Department of Orthopedic, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Dawei
  surname: Han
  fullname: Han, Dawei
  organization: Department of Orthopedic, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Xiaofang
  surname: Ying
  fullname: Ying, Xiaofang
  organization: Department of Orthopedic, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Cong
  surname: Chen
  fullname: Chen, Cong
  organization: Department of Orthopedic, Suqian First People's Hospital, Suqian, Jiangsu, China
– sequence: 5
  givenname: Hua
  surname: Luo
  fullname: Luo, Hua
  email: 18732196660@163.com
  organization: Department of Orthopedic, Taizhou Hospital of Zhejiang Province affiliated to Wenzhou Medical University, Taizhou, Zhejiang, China. Electronic address: 18732196660@163.com
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40180135$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
BookMark eNpNkNtq3DAQhkVJyfkNStFlb7zVwXK8vXPStNsSSMjhepE1412lsrSV5C37NHnViCaBwMDMz3z_PzBHZM8Hj4R84mzGGW--Ps50zOsYZoIJNWOylPpADrkSTSWF5Hvv5gNylNIjY0zKVu6Tg5rxlnGpDsnTechr2v1PSiZsrNHO7WiXkk0Zgd5NeYpIz6ecg6faA12E8IfeOJ2x2JBeDgOabLdIraf3EXW2fkU7M5X9wq7W1SpqKKiJYbTBOL21ZnI60t_B-ky_2-SCKabgv9GO3u3K1bFIQ29xa_HfCfk4aJfw9LUfk4cfl_cXi-rq-uevi-6qMrJpctWoed_UHABqlKLuB3XWtggw8FrOQcmiz0w_hx4QBgAzoOJK1lAr2TcKtDgmX15yNzH8nTDl5WiTQee0xzClpeRtIxWbC1HQz6_o1I8Iy020o4675dtTxTOyGIBe
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright Copyright © 2025 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2025. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Copyright_xml – notice: Copyright © 2025 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
– notice: Copyright © 2025. Published by Elsevier Inc.
DBID CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
DOI 10.1016/j.arthro.2025.03.035
DatabaseName Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitle MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList MEDLINE
MEDLINE - Academic
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: 7X8
  name: MEDLINE - Academic
  url: https://search.proquest.com/medline
  sourceTypes: Aggregation Database
DeliveryMethod no_fulltext_linktorsrc
EISSN 1526-3231
ExternalDocumentID 40180135
Genre Systematic Review
Journal Article
Review
GroupedDBID --K
.1-
.FO
.GJ
0R~
1B1
1P~
1RT
1~5
3O-
4.4
457
4G.
53G
5RE
5VS
7-5
AAEDT
AAEDW
AALRI
AAQFI
AAQQT
AAQXK
AAXUO
AAYWO
ABLJU
ABMAC
ABWVN
ACRPL
ADBBV
ADMUD
ADNMO
AEVXI
AFJKZ
AFRHN
AFTJW
AGQPQ
AHHHB
AITUG
AJUYK
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AMRAJ
ASPBG
AVWKF
AZFZN
BELOY
C5W
CAG
CGR
COF
CUY
CVF
EBS
ECM
EFJIC
EFKBS
EIF
EJD
F5P
FDB
FEDTE
FGOYB
G-2
GBLVA
HEE
HEK
HMK
HMO
HVGLF
HZ~
IHE
J1W
KOM
M28
M31
M41
MO0
N9A
NPM
NQ-
O9-
OF~
OR-
R2-
ROL
RPZ
SAE
SEL
SES
SEW
SJN
SSZ
UHS
UV1
WUQ
XH2
Z5R
ZXP
7X8
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c366t-659b641ddd4e324bf5788eddf1439d53f577cb9dbdedfddcfe51534d453b65da2
IEDL.DBID 7X8
ISICitedReferencesCount 0
ISICitedReferencesURI http://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=Summon&SrcAuth=ProQuest&DestLinkType=CitingArticles&DestApp=WOS_CPL&KeyUT=001584306000049&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
ISSN 1526-3231
IngestDate Fri Oct 03 00:35:08 EDT 2025
Wed Sep 24 03:04:55 EDT 2025
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 9
Language English
License Copyright © 2025 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c366t-659b641ddd4e324bf5788eddf1439d53f577cb9dbdedfddcfe51534d453b65da2
Notes ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
ObjectType-Review-3
content type line 23
PMID 40180135
PQID 3186350922
PQPubID 23479
ParticipantIDs proquest_miscellaneous_3186350922
pubmed_primary_40180135
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2025-09-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2025-09-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 09
  year: 2025
  text: 2025-09-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2020
PublicationPlace United States
PublicationPlace_xml – name: United States
PublicationTitle Arthroscopy
PublicationTitleAlternate Arthroscopy
PublicationYear 2025
SSID ssj0003383
Score 2.4765062
SecondaryResourceType review_article
Snippet To conduct a systematic review of clinical studies comparing the clinical outcomes of arthroscopically assisted suture button (AASB) and hook plate (HP) in the...
SourceID proquest
pubmed
SourceType Aggregation Database
Index Database
StartPage 3733
SubjectTerms Acromioclavicular Joint - injuries
Acromioclavicular Joint - surgery
Arthroscopy - methods
Bone Plates
Humans
Joint Dislocations - surgery
Suture Techniques - instrumentation
Treatment Outcome
Title Both Arthroscopically Assisted Suture Button and Hook Plate Are Effective in Treating Acute High-grade Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocation: A Systematic Review
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40180135
https://www.proquest.com/docview/3186350922
Volume 41
WOSCitedRecordID wos001584306000049&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com%2F%23%21%2Fsearch%3Fho%3Df%26include.ft.matches%3Dt%26l%3Dnull%26q%3D
hasFullText
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
link http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV3BatwwEBVp00MvTUvTNk1aptCryNqy5HUuYZs0hJIuC0lgb4ukkRPDIm93N4F8TX-1M7I3ufRQ6MVgywKjedI8a0ZvhPha1iErdLDSmUEtCyystEhETofMhdIZlbt0UPiiHI-H02k16TfcVn1a5WZNTAs1tp73yA8Je-QbB1WeHy9-Sa4axdHVvoTGM7GtiMowqsvpk1q46mQ4yUUZqYjIbI7Opfwussztko__5TrJnPYF3_5KMpOzOdv53898LV71NBNGHS7eiK0Q34rf38gs_OyWJSzbBdtn_gBkIbY1wmXSFwGuXd1GsBHhnCg4TObER6lbgE7qmNZHaCJcJboZb2Dk76idE0bkzdIivco5fk3r5_a-SWmu8KNt4hpOmxW7TobCEYzg8lFEGroIxa64Pvt-dXIu-wIN0itj1tLoypkiQ8QiEDFzNU3_YUCsiYRVqBXdl95V6DBgjejrQOxJESC0ckajzd-J57GN4YOAwnrjVeZ0yLPCmoHFgXPohlWNpaXfmj3xZTPeM5oAHNWwMbR3q9nTiO-J953RZotOqWNWsDxZpvTHf-i9L14yFrr8sQOxXdP0D5_EC3-_blbLzwlZdB1Pfv4BkyXdgA
linkProvider ProQuest
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Both+Arthroscopically+Assisted+Suture+Button+and+Hook+Plate+Are+Effective+in+Treating+Acute+High-grade+Acromioclavicular+Joint+Dislocation%3A+A+Systematic+Review&rft.jtitle=Arthroscopy&rft.au=Liang%2C+Junbo&rft.au=Han%2C+Dawei&rft.au=Ying%2C+Xiaofang&rft.au=Chen%2C+Cong&rft.date=2025-09-01&rft.issn=1526-3231&rft.eissn=1526-3231&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.arthro.2025.03.035&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1526-3231&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1526-3231&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1526-3231&client=summon