No abstract

BackgroundThe management of acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries depends on the degree of injury diagnosed by the Rockwood classification. Inadequate imaging and not selecting the most helpful imaging protocols can often lead to incorrect diagnosis of the injury. A consensus on a diagnostic imaging protocol for acute AC joint injuries does not currently exist. Therefore we conducted a systematic review of the literature considering three diagnostic parameters for patients with acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries: 1) Assessment of vertical instability; 2) Assessment of horizontal instability; 3) Benefit of weighted panoramic views.MethodsInternet databases were searched in March 2016 using the terms (“AC joint” OR “acromioclavicular joint”) AND (MRI OR MR OR radiograph OR X-ray OR Xray OR ultrasound OR “computer tomography” OR “computed tomography” OR CT). Diagnostic, prospective, retrospective, cohort and cross- sectional studies were included to compare their use of different radiological methods. Case reports, cadaveric studies, and studies concerning chronic AC injuries and clinical outcomes were excluded.ResultsThis search returned 1359 citations of which 1151 were excluded based on title, 116 based on abstract and 75 based on manuscript. 17 studies were included for review and were analyzed for their contributions to the three parameters of interest mentioned above. The inter- and intra-observer reliability for diagnosing vertical instabilities of the clavicle using x-ray alone show a high level of reproducibility while for horizontal instabilities the values were much more variable. In general, digitally measured parameters seem to be more precise and reliable between investigators than visual classification alone. Currently, evidence for the value of weighted views and other additional diagnostic imaging to supplement standard x-rays is controversial.ConclusionTo date there is no consensus on a gold standard for diagnostic measures needed to classify acute AC joint injuries. The inter- and intra-observer reliability for diagnosing vertical instabilities of the clavicle using bilateral projections show a high level of reproducibility while for horizontal instabilities the results are much more inconsistent. There is currently no clear consensus on a protocol for image-based diagnosis and classification of acute AC joint injuries, leading to a lack of confidence in reproducibility and reliability.

No abstract

PurposeThe relationship between posterior shoulder instability and increased glenoid retroversion has been documented. Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy is a possible treatment option for patients with increased glenoid retroversion, but outcomes in the literature are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior glenoid osteotomy. Methods Patients that underwent posterior glenoid osteotomy for posterior shoulder instability with a GR angle of more than or equal to 10°, and were at least 12 months out from surgery, were included in the study. General data, medical history, and radiographic data such as the pre-and postoperative glenoid retroversion angle were extracted from the patients' hospital documentation notes. To evaluate the postoperative outcome, the Rowe standard rating scale for shoulder instability and the Oxford shoulder instability score were collected retrospectively. Results A total of 12 shoulders (11 patients) could be included. The mean pre-operative glenoid retroversion was 23.3° (range 12°-35°) and this reduced signiicantly (p = 0.003) to a mean of 13° (range 1°-28°) postoperatively. At a mean follow-up of 19.8 months (range 14-36), the median Rowe score was 90 points (range 45-100 points) and the median Oxford instability score was 44 points (range 21-48 points). There were no postoperative re-dislocations or revision surgeries; however, one patient reported signs of recurrent shoulder instability and four asymptomatic glenoid neck fractures occurred. Conclusion Open wedge posterior glenoid osteotomy provides reliable clinical results with a low rate of clinical failure in a stringently selected patient cohort at short-term follow-up. However, due to the risk of potentially severe complications, we advocate this procedure for experienced shoulder surgeons only, who are familiar with its anatomical and technical considerations. Level of evidence IV (case series).

Purpose To compare sagittal and coronal tibial slopes between anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injured subjects with and without posterolateral meniscus root tear (PLRT). Methods A chart review was conducted to identify patients with isolated ACL tears and patients with an associated PLRT. Patients with other concomitant injuries and patients who underwent surgery > 6 months after the injury were excluded. Magnetic resonance image data were used to compare the medial and lateral sagittal tibial slope (MTS and LTS), lateral-tomedial slope asymmetry (LTS-MTS), and coronal slope of the tibial plateau between both groups. Mean LTS and standard deviation (SD) of the control group were calculated, and a value of > mean + 1 SD was considered an abnormal LTS. Interobserver reproducibility was assessed by calculating interclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) of measurements independently obtained by two reviewers. Results Fifty-nine patients met the in-and exclusion criteria. Thirty nine (66%) had an isolated ACL tear and 20 (34%) had an associated PLRT. Interrater ICCs for LTS, MTS, and coronal slope were 0.930, 0.884 and 0.825, respectively, representing good to excellent interobserver reproducibility. Patients with a PLRT had significantly steeper LTS (8.0 ± 3.2 vs. 4.0 ± 2.0; p < 0.001) and significantly greater difference of LTS-MTS (3.7 ± 2.9 vs. − 0.6 ± 2.0; p < 0.001). Furthermore, patients with abnormal LTS were significantly overrepresented among patients with PLRT (70% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). No significant difference between both groups was found for MTS and coronal slope. Conclusion A steep lateral tibial slope and lateral-to-medial slope asymmetry are risk factors for concomitant PLRT in ACL-injured subjects. Level of evidence IV, retrospective cohort study.