Abstract
Management of highly displaced acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) injuries remain contentious. It is unclear if delayed versus acute reconstruction has an increased risk of fixation failure and complications. The primary aim of this was to compare complications of early versus delayed reconstruction. The secondary aim was to determine modes of failure of ACJ reconstruction requiring revision surgery.
A retrospective study was performed of all patients who underwent operative reconstruction of ACJ injuries over a 10-year period (Rockwood III-V). Reconstruction was classed as early (<12 weeks from injury) or delayed (≥12 weeks). Patient demographics, fixation method and post-operative complications were noted, with one-year follow-up a minimum requirement for inclusion. Fixation failure was defined as loss of reduction requiring revision surgery.
104 patients were analysed (n=60 early and n=44 delayed). Mean age was 42.0 (SD 11.2, 17–70 years), 84.6% male and 16/104 were smokers. No difference was observed between fixation failure (p=0.39) or deep infection (p=0.13) with regards to acute versus delayed reconstruction. No patient demographic or timing of surgery was predictive of fixation failure on regression modelling. Overall, eleven patients underwent revision surgery for loss of reduction and implant failure (n=5 suture fatigue, n=2 endo-button escape, n=2 coracoid stress fracture and n=2 deep infection).
This study suggests that delayed ACJ reconstruction does not have a higher incidence of fixation failure or major complications compared to acute reconstruction. For those patients with ongoing pain and instability following a trial of non-operative treatment, delayed reconstruction would appear to be a safe treatment approach.
