Acromioclavicular joint dislocation Examination corner

Acromioclavicular joint dislocation Examination corner

Rockwood classification (1984)4

 

Or more simply the “Six S’s”

Types I–III account for 98% of these injuries. 
Controversies of surgical versus non­surgical man­
agement surround type III fractures, which make up 
40% of all ACJ injuries.
4 Rockwood CA Jr. (1984) Subluxations and dislocations 
about the shoulder. Injuries to the acromioclavicular joint. 
In: Rockwood CA Jr., Green DP (eds.) Fractures, edn. 2, vol. 1. 
Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, pp. 860–910.
Imaging
AP with 10°–15° cephalic tilt – outlines joint/loose 

bodies
Stress radiograph with 4­kg weight suspended 
from patient’s wrist – helps differentiate between 
type II and III injuries
 
Management
Types I and II are managed non­operatively; types 
IV–VI, with surgery. Controversy surrounds the type 
III injury, as to whether to manage operatively or 
non­operatively. There is possibly a case for surgery 
in a heavy manual labourer or an athlete.
A wide variety of operative procedures have been 
described but none has been shown to be clearly 
superior to the others. Newer arthroscopic tech­
niques to manage ACJ injuries are evolving, they 
cause less disruption to the soft tissue envelope but 
there is a steep learning curve.
Non-operative management
Sling or brace for 6–8 weeks
Loss of shoulder and elbow motion
Soft­tissue calcification
Interference with ADLs
Late ACJ osteoarthritis
 
Operative management
The use of K­wires to fix the ACJ is now contraindi­
cated. It is dangerous as pin breakage and migration 
can occur, it gives relatively poor fixation and a sec­
ond procedure for hardware removal is required
Steinman pin across the ACJ. Given the wider 
range of better implants now available, this is not 
recommended
Coracoclavicular lag screw (Bosworth screw) with 
repair of CCL and plication of the torn deltoid and 
trapezius. Gone out of favour as concerns with 
loss of screw fixation or screw breakage, etc.
Dynamic muscle transfers. Transfer of the lateral 
half of the conjoined tendon to the distal clavicle 
augmented by EndoButton fixation of the ACJ. A 
major procedure with more risks involved than 
are necessary such as musculocutaneous nerve 
injury and loss of fixation
Coracoclavicular cerclage. A well­established 
technique, materials include tendons, wire loops 
and synthetic ligament substitutes such as Dacron 
or Mersilene tape
Clavicular hook plate. Needs removing after heal­
ing of the soft tissues
Arthroscopic techniques. The CCL is dissected 
from the undersurface of the acromion and is 
reinserted on the inferior clavicle by transosseous 
suture fixation. Other techniques involve the use 
of a semitendinosus allograft to reconstruct the 
CCL. The accuracy of reduction of the joint is 
more difficult to assess arthroscopically
 

Complications of conservative management
Cosmetic “bump” on the distal clavicle
Painful ACJ with degenerative changes. If severe, 
it is managed with excision of the distal clavicle 
and reconstruction of the CCL by using the cora­
coacromial ligament (Weaver–Dunn procedure)
 
Prognosis
Up to 100% good/excellent results with type I/II 
injuries
Patients with non­operative management of type 
III injuries may experience mild discomfort, but 
no reduction of strength or endurance compared 
to the non­injured side at 4 years
Return to work and rehabilitation are quicker with 
 
non­operative management for type I–III injuries   
 
 
 

ACROMIOCLAVICULAR DISLOCATION

 
   RELATED LINK