Operative versus non-operative management following Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular separation: A meta-analysis of the current evidence base

被引:103
作者
Smith T.O. [1 ]
Chester R. [1 ]
Pearse E.O. [2 ]
Hing C.B. [2 ]
机构
[1] Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of East Anglia, Norwich
[2] St George's Hospital, London
关键词
ACJT; Acromioclavicular; Dislocation; Rockwood type; Systematic review;
D O I
10.1007/s10195-011-0127-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Whilst there is little debate over the treatment of Rockwood grade V and VI acromioclavicular dislocation, the management of grade III acromioclavicular dislocation remains less clear. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients managed operatively and non-operatively following grade III acromioclavicular dislocation. Materials and methods: A systematic review of published and unpublished material was conducted. All included studies were reviewed against the PEDro appraisal tool. Where appropriate, a meta-analysis of pooled results was conducted. Results: Among 724 citations, six studies met the eligibility criteria. All six studies were retrospective case series (level 4 evidence). The findings of this study indicated that operative management of grade III acromioclavicular dislocation results in a better cosmetic outcome (P < 0.0001) but greater duration of sick leave compared to non-operative management (P < 0.001). There was no difference in strength, pain, throwing ability and incidence of acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis compared to non-operative management. Only one study recorded and showed a higher Constant score for operative management compared to non-operative management (P = 0.003). Conclusions: There is a lack of well-designed studies in the literature to justify the optimum mode of treatment of grade III acromioclavicular dislocations. © 2011 The Author(s).
引用
收藏
页码:19 / 27
页数:8
相关论文
共 41 条
  • [1] Rockwood C.A., Williams G.R., Young D.C., Acromioclavicular injuries, Fractures in Adults, Vol 1, pp. 1341-1413, (1996)
  • [2] Rolf O., Hann Von Weyhern A., Ewers A., Boehm T.D., Gohlke F., Acromioclavicular dislocation Rockwood III-V: Results of early versus delayed surgical treatment, Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 128, pp. 1153-1157, (2008)
  • [3] Hootman J.M., Acromioclavicular Dislocation: Conservative or Surgical Therapy, Journal of Athletic Training, 39, 1, pp. 10-11, (2004)
  • [4] Bradley J.P., Elkousy H., Decision making: Operative versus nonoperative treatment of acromioclavicular joint injuries, Clinics in Sports Medicine, 22, 2, pp. 277-290, (2003)
  • [5] Bathis H., Tingart M., Bouillon B., Tiling T., Conservative or surgical therapy of acromioclavicular joint injury-what is reliable? A systematic analysis of the literature using "evidence-based medicine" criteria, Chirurg, 71, pp. 1082-1089, (2000)
  • [6] Phillips A.M., Smart C., Groom A.F.G., Acromioclavicular dislocation: Conservative or surgical therapy, Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 353, pp. 10-17, (1998)
  • [7] Ceccarelli E., Bondi R., Alviti F., Garofalo R., Miulli F., Padua R., Treatment of acute grade III acromioclavicular dislocation: A lack of evidence, J Orthop Traumatol, 9, pp. 105-108, (2008)
  • [8] Calvo E., Lopez-Franco M., Arribas I.M., Clinical and radiological outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of type III acromioclavicular joint injury, J Shoulder Elbow Surg, 15, pp. 300-305, (2006)
  • [9] Taft T.N., Wilson F.C., Oglesby J.W., Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint, J Bone Joint Surg Am, 69, pp. 1045-1051, (1987)
  • [10] Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G., Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement, BMJ, 339, (2009)