Hook plate versus tightrope for acute grade III acromioclavicular dislocation

Sokkar, Sherif; Radwan, Mohamed A; Toreih, Ahmed Ali

doi:10.4103/1110-1148.203147

Cited by 5 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fifteen studies met all of the eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis (Fig. 1) [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. Four studies were level II evidence [19][20][21][22], and the remaining eleven studies were level III evidence [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33].…”

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1) [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. Four studies were level II evidence [19][20][21][22], and the remaining eleven studies were level III evidence [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33]. All 15 studies were published in English between 2013 and 2022, with a cumulative total of 682 cases.…”

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of the LOE II studies [19][20][21] were assessed as having a high risk of bias. The high risk was caused by bias from randomization.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Cochrane Assessment Tool Versionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eleven studies [19,20,22,[25][26][27][28][29][31][32][33] included pain assessment scales in their study. The pooled estimate for both LOE II and LOE III studies demonstrated significant differences between the hook plate and double-button fixation in favor of double-button fixation (SMD 0.333, 95% CI 0.139-3.369, p = 0.001, I 2 = 85%; Fig.…”

Section: Clinical Outcomes For Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Cohen, the magnitude effect is between medium and small, suggesting that between 58 and 69% of the results with the hook plate were inferior to the results when using doublebutton fixation [34]. Three LOE II studies [19,20,22] included pain assessment scales in their study. The pooled estimate for LOE II studies demonstrated significant differences between the hook plate and double-button fixation in favor of doublebutton fixation (SMD 0.481, 95% CI 0.155-0.806, p = 0.004, I 2 = 59%; Fig.…”

Section: Clinical Outcomes For Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Clinical outcomes for grades III–V acromioclavicular dislocations favor double-button fixation compared to clavicle hook plate fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hohmann

Tetsworth

2023

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of both randomized controlled and observational studies comparing double-button suture fixation to hook plate fixation for types III–IV acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Methods Systematic review of Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar, including all levels 1–3 studies from 2000 to 2022. Clinical outcome scores, range of motion, and complications were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s ROB2 tool and ROBINs-I tool. MINORS and modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) were used to assess within study quality. The GRADE system was used to assess the overall quality of the body of evidence. Heterogeneity was assessed using χ2 and I2 statistics. Results Fifteen studies were included. Three of the four included LOE II and eleven of the LOE III studies had a high risk of bias. Study quality was considered poor and fair for 67% by MINORS criteria and 93% for CMS criteria. The pooled estimate (SMD 0.662) for all clinical outcomes was statistically significant and in favor of button repair (p = 0.0001). The pooled estimate (SMD 0.662) for all VAS pain scores was statistically significant, again in favor of button repair (p = 0.001). Conclusions The results of this meta-analysis demonstrated significantly better outcomes of button repair for acute ACJ dislocations when compared to clavicle hook plate. Button repair is also associated with a 2.2 times lower risk for complications. However, risk of bias is high, and study quality within and between studies was low. These results, therefore, must be viewed with caution. Level of evidence Level III; systematic review and meta-analysis.

show abstract

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Selection and Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of the LOE II studies [19][20][21] were assessed as having a high risk of bias. The high risk was caused by bias from randomization.…”

Section: Risk Of Bias Cochrane Assessment Tool Versionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Outcomes For Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Clinical Outcomes For Painmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical outcomes for grades III–V acromioclavicular dislocations favor double-button fixation compared to clavicle hook plate fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Hohmann

Tetsworth

2023

Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Surgical treatment, complications, and reimbursement among patients with clavicle fracture and acromioclavicular dislocations: a US retrospective claims database analysis

Putnam¹,

Vanderkarr²,

Nandwani³

et al. 2019

Journal of Medical Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Double-Button Technique is Superior to Hook Plate in the Treatment of Acute Rockwood Type III/V Acromioclavicular Dislocations

Yapıcı¹

2021

Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to compare open double-button (DB) and hook plate (HP) techniques in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocation (ACJD) in terms of clinical and radiological outcomes and to determine which method is superior. METHODS: This retrospective comparative study included patients with ACJDs (Rockwood Type III/V) who were treated with one of these implants (22 patients with HP, 21 patients with DB) between June 2014 and February 2018. RESULTS: A total of 43 patients (39 men and 4 women) with a mean age of 41.8±17.4 years have participated in this study. The mean follow-up time was 20.6±7.5 months. Mean times of fluoroscopy, operation, and return to work were shorter in the DB group. Complication rates were 23.8% and 54.6%, reoperation rates (including mandatory implant removals [IR]) were 4.8% and 77.3%, mean constant scores were 92.1±3.4 and 88.3±4.2, and mean Visual Analog Scale scores were 0.8±1.0 and 1.5±1.0 for the DB and HP groups, respectively. IR was the main reason for reoperations in the HP group, whereas the DB group’s only reoperation was caused by a coracoid cutout (due to coracoid tunnel malposition) leading to redislocation. AC joint arthritis (36.4%) and subacromial osteolysis (31.9%) were commonly encountered in the HP group. The most frequent complication of the DB group was malreduction (initial undercorrection) (9.6%). CONCLUSION: DB was superior to HP in functional outcome, post-operative pain, complication and reoperation rates, operation and fluoroscopy times, and time to return to work. Besides, reoperation (for IR) was needed in most of the HP patients. Therefore, the open DB technique should be preferential to the HP procedure.

show abstract

Hook plate versus tightrope for acute grade III acromioclavicular dislocation

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Clinical outcomes for grades III–V acromioclavicular dislocations favor double-button fixation compared to clavicle hook plate fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Clinical outcomes for grades III–V acromioclavicular dislocations favor double-button fixation compared to clavicle hook plate fixation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Surgical treatment, complications, and reimbursement among patients with clavicle fracture and acromioclavicular dislocations: a US retrospective claims database analysis

Open Double-Button Technique is Superior to Hook Plate in the Treatment of Acute Rockwood Type III/V Acromioclavicular Dislocations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About