Structural Failure After Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction: Factors Affecting Clinical Outcomes

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States

2 Maine General Orthopaedics, Augusta, ME, United States

10.22038/abjs.2025.88607.4017

Abstract

Objectives: Management of acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries remains controversial regarding ideal surgical indications and technique. While loss of reduction following AC reconstruction is common, its relationship to clinical outcomes is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes and potential predictors of suboptimal results in patients with structural failure following AC reconstruction. 
Methods: Patients with structural failure following AC reconstruction from 2013-2019 were identified, defined as 50% loss of coronal AC joint reduction between immediate and final postoperative radiographs. Failures were categorized by degree of displacement and mechanism, which included traumatic reinjury versus spontaneous subsidence of AC reduction. Suboptimal clinical outcomes were defined as undergoing reoperation or postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score less than 80. Bivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for suboptimal clinical results and compare outcomes between operative versus nonoperative management of structural failure.
Results: Twenty-nine patients were evaluated with mean follow-up of 7.4 years (range 4.0-10.5 years). 21% underwent revision surgery (n = 6) and 79% were treated nonoperatively (n = 23). Mean postoperative ASES, Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores at final follow-up were 82 +/- 20 (range 33-100), 1.6 +/- 2.2 (range 0-7), and 82 +/- 20 (range 22-100) respectively. 41% of the total cohort (n = 12) had a suboptimal clinical result. On bivariate analysis, structural failure following acute reinjury was associated with suboptimal clinical outcomes (50% vs 6%, p = 0.011) and a higher likelihood of reoperation (67% vs 13%, p = 0.018).
Conclusion: Structural failures of AC reconstruction following an acute injury are more likely to experience suboptimal clinical outcomes and undergo reoperation compared to spontaneous loss of reduction. Larger analyses are warranted to determine if there are additional factors which may affect outcomes and guide management in these clinical scenarios.
        Level of evidence: IV

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Aliberti GM, Kraeutler MJ, Trojan JD, Mulcahey MK. Horizontal Instability of the Acromioclavicular Joint: A Systematic Review. Am J Sports Med. 2020;48(2):504–10. doi: 10.1177/0363546519831013.
  2. Cadenat F. The treatment of dislocations and fractures of the outer end of the clavicle. Int Clin. 1917;1:145–69.
  3. Berthold DP, Muench LN, Dyrna F, et al. Current concepts in acromioclavicular joint (AC) instability - a proposed treatment algorithm for acute and chronic AC-joint surgery. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):1078. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05935-0.
  4. Frank RM, Cotter EJ, Leroux TS, Romeo AA. Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries: Evidence-based Treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;27(17):e775–88. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00105.
  5. Beitzel K, Cote MP, Apostolakos J, et al. Current concepts in the treatment of acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy. 2013;29(2):387–97. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.11.023.
  6. Canadian Orthopaedic Trauma Society. Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Nonoperative Versus Operative Treatment of Acute Acromio-Clavicular Joint Dislocation. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(11):479–87. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000437.
  7. Chang N, Furey A, Kurdin A. Operative Versus Nonoperative Management of Acute High-Grade Acromioclavicular Dislocations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Orthop Trauma. 2018;32(1):1–9. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001004.
  8. Natera Cisneros LG, Sarasquete Reiriz J. Acute high-grade acromioclavicular joint injuries: quality of life comparison between patients managed operatively with a hook plate versus patients managed non-operatively. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol Orthop Traumatol. 2017;27(3):341–50. doi: 10.1007/s00590-016-1862-z.
  9. Murray IR, Robinson PG, Goudie EB, Duckworth AD, Clark K, Robinson CM. Open Reduction and Tunneled Suspensory Device Fixation Compared with Nonoperative Treatment for Type-III and Type-IV Acromioclavicular Joint Dislocations: The ACORN Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018;100(22):1912–8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.00412.
  10. Cerciello S, Berthold DP, Uyeki C, et al. Anatomic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction (ACCR) using free tendon allograft is effective for chronic acromioclavicular joint injuries at mid-term follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2021;29(7):2096–102.
  11. Gstettner C, Tauber M, Hitzl W, Resch H. Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: surgical versus conservative treatment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17(2):220–5. doi: 10.1007/s00167-020-06123-0.
  12. Moatshe G, Kruckeberg BM, Chahla J, et al. Acromioclavicular and Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction for Acromioclavicular Joint Instability: A Systematic Review of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2018;34(6):1979-1995.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.01.016.
  13. Mori D, Nishiyama H, Haku S, Funakoshi N, Yamashita F, Kobayashi M. Coracoclavicular and acromioclavicular ligament reconstruction with a double-bundle semitendinosus autograft and cortical buttons for chronic acromioclavicular joint dislocations: clinical and imaging outcomes. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024;33(9):e507–18. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.01.019.
  14. Muench LN, Kia C, Jerliu A, et al. Functional and Radiographic Outcomes After Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction for Type III/V Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(11):2325967119884539. doi: 10.1177/2325967119884539.
  15. Van Eecke E, Struelens B, Muermans S. Long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of arthroscopic acromioclavicular stabilization for acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Clin Shoulder Elb. 2024;27(2):219–28. doi: 10.5397/cise.2023.01060.
  16. Chen RE, Gates ST, Vaughan A, et al. Complications after operative treatment of high-grade acromioclavicular injuries. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2023;32(9):1972-1980. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2023.03.019.
  17. Karargyris O, Murphy RJ, Arenas A, Bolliger L, Zumstein MA. Improved identification of unstable acromioclavicular joint injuries in a clinical population using the acromial center line to dorsal clavicle radiographic measurement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020;29(8):1599-1605. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.12.014.
  18. Skjaker SA, Enger M, Pripp AH, Nordsletten L, Bøe B. Inter- and Intrarater Reliability of the Acromioclavicular Joint Injury Classification on Anteroposterior Radiographs. Orthop J Sports Med. 2025;13(5):23259671251337470. doi: 10.1177/23259671251337470.
  19. Tulner SAF, Fowler A, Edwards KL, et al. Radiographic appearance of the distal clavicle in relation to the acromion after acromioclavicular joint reconstruction using a braided polyester mesh. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2019;10(3):486–91.

 

           doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.01.012.

  1. Shin SJ, Kim NK. Complications after arthroscopic coracoclavicular reconstruction using a single adjustable-loop-length suspensory fixation device in acute acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(5):816–24. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2014.11.013.
  2. Jones BK, Fuller C, Kweon C. Failed suspension button acromioclavicular joint reconstruction revised with double-loop suture cerclage: a case report and review of the literature. JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2023;3(3):392–7. doi: 10.1016/j.xrrt.2023.03.001.
  3. Duralde XA, McClelland WB. The clinical results of arthroscopic transtendinous repair of grade III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears. Arthroscopy. 2012;28(2):160–8. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.08.286.
  4. Namdari S, Donegan RP, Chamberlain AM, Galatz LM, Yamaguchi K, Keener JD. Factors affecting outcome after structural failure of repaired rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 15;96(2):99–105. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00551.
  5. Park JY, Chung KT, Yoo MJ. A serial comparison of arthroscopic repairs for partial- and full-thickness rotator cuff tears. Arthroscopy. 2004;20(7):705–11. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2004.06.013.
  6. Spencer HT, Hsu L, Sodl J, Arianjam A, Yian EH. Radiographic failure and rates of re-operation after acromioclavicular joint reconstruction: a comparison of surgical techniques. Bone Jt J. 2016;98-B(4):512–8. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B4.35935.
  7. Choi NH, Lim SM, Lee SY, Lim TK. Loss of reduction and complications of coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction with autogenous tendon graft in acute acromioclavicular dislocations. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;26(4):692–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.014.
  8. Clavert P, Meyer A, Boyer P, et al. Complication rates and types of failure after arthroscopic acute acromioclavicular dislocation fixation. Prospective multicenter study of 116 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR. 2015;101(8 Suppl):S313-316. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.09.012.
  9. Milewski MD, Tompkins M, Giugale JM, Carson EW, Miller MD, Diduch DR. Complications related to anatomic reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(7):1628–34. doi: 10.1177/0363546512445273.
  10. Lee BK, Jamgochian GC, Syed UAM, et al. Reconstruction of Acute Acromioclavicular (AC) Joint Dislocations with or without Tendon Graft: a Retrospective Comparative Study. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2019;7(3):239–45.
  11. Weinstein DM, McCann PD, McIlveen SJ, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU. Surgical treatment of complete acromioclavicular dislocations. Am J Sports Med. 1995;23(3):324–31. doi: 10.1177/036354659502300313.
  12. Millett PJ, Horan MP, Warth RJ. Two-Year Outcomes After Primary Anatomic Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(10):1962–73. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2015.03.034.
  13. Lasanianos NG, Kanakaris NK, Dimitriou R, Pape HC, Giannoudis PV. Second hit phenomenon: existing evidence of clinical implications. Injury. 2011;42(7):617–29. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2011.02.011.
  14. Sheean AJ, Lubowitz JH, Brand JC, Rossi MJ. Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport: Fear of Reinjury Is the Leading Reason for Failure to Return to Competitive Sport and Is Modifiable. Arthroscopy. 2023 1;39(8):1775–8. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2023.04.020.

 

 

 

 

The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 13, Issue 12
December 2025
Pages 807-815

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 July 2025
  • Revise Date: 17 September 2025
  • Accept Date: 03 September 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics