Coracoclavicular Ligament Reconstruction: Coracoid Tunnel Diameter Correlates With Failure Risk
Abstract
The current study compared tunnel diameter as an independent risk factor for fixation failure from the coracoid after transcoracoid coracoclavicular reconstruction. The effect of variation in coracoid size and scapular bone density on fixation failure was also studied. Sixty-two cadaveric scapulae were randomized into 1 of 4 groups: a control group with no coracoid hole, a group with a 4-mm transcoracoid tunnel, a group with a 6-mm transcoracoid tunnel, and a group with a socket technique using a 6-mm hole superiorly with a 4-mm hole inferiorly. Bone density measures for all specimens were performed. Coracoid dimensions were quantified. Using a cortical button device, all specimens were loaded to failure with an Instron servohydraulic testing machine (Instron Corp, Canton, Massachusetts). All drilled specimens failed by button pullout, and all control specimens failed by coracoid fracture. Average pullout strength for each tunnel subgroup was as follows: 4 mm, 296.9 N; 6 mm, 146.2 N; 6-4 socket, 261.8 N; control, 762.9 N. No difference was found with respect to tunnel subgroups in base height (P=.25) or bone density (P=.44). Load to failure for the control group was significantly higher than for the other 3 techniques. The 4-mm tunnel load to failure was significantly higher than that for the 6-mm tunnel (P=.006). No difference was found between the 4-mm tunnel and the 6-4 socket technique (P=.853). Although it was not statistically significant, a very strong trend was seen toward increased strength of the 6-4 socket over the 6-mm tunnel (P=.051). The study results show that when employing a transcoracoid reconstruction technique, a 4-mm tunnel technique is significantly stronger than a 6-mm tunnel technique. None of the coracoids drilled with the various tunnels approached the strength of the native coracoid controls using a looped wire technique.
- 1.Kaplan LD, Flanigan DC, Norwig J, Jost P, Bradley J. Prevalence and variance of shoulder injuries in elite collegiate football players. Am J Sports Med. 2005; 33(8):1142–1146.
10.1177/0363546505274718 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 2.Simovitch R, Sanders B, Ozbaydar M, Lavery K, Warner JJ. Acromioclavicular joint injuries: diagnosis and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009; 17(4):207–219. Crossref Medline, Google Scholar
- 3.Rockwood CA, Williams GR, Young D. Disorders of the acromioclavicular joint. In: , eds. The Shoulder. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1990:483–553. Google Scholar
- 4.Walz L, Salzmann GM, Fabbro T, Eichhorn S, Imhoff AB. The anatomic reconstruction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations using 2 TightRope devices: a biomechanical study. Am J Sports Med. 2008; 36(12):2398–2406.
10.1177/0363546508322524 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 5.Salzmann GM, Paul J, Sandmann GH, Imhoff AB, Schöttle PB. The coracoidal insertion of the coracoclavicular ligaments: an anatomic study. Am J Sports Med. 2008; 36(12):2392–2397.
10.1177/0363546508322887 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 6.Rios CG, Arciero RA, Mazzocca AD. Anatomy of the clavicle and coracoid process for reconstruction of the coracoclavicular ligaments. Am J Sports Med. 2007; 35(5):811–817.
10.1177/0363546506297536 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 7.Ferreira JV, Chowaniec D, Obopilwe E, Nowak MD, Arciero RA, Mazzocca AD. Biomechanical evaluation of effect of coracoid tunnel placement on load to failure of fixation during repair of acromioclavicular joint dislocations. Arthroscopy. 2012; 28(9):1230–1236.
10.1016/j.arthro.2009.12.031 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 8.Kummer FJ, Thut DC, Pahk B, Hergan DJ, Jazrawi LM, Meislin RJ. Drill holes for coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction increase coracoid fracture risk. Shoulder & Elbow2011; 3(3):163–165.
10.1111/j.1758-5740.2011.00130.x . Crossref, Google Scholar - 9.Turman KA, Miller CD, Miller MD. Clavicular fractures following coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction with tendon graft: a report of three cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010; 92:1526–1532.
10.2106/JBJS.I.00410 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 10.Jeon IH, Dewnany G, Hartley R, Neumann L, Wallace WA. Chronic acromioclavicular separation: the medium term results of coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction using braided polyester prosthetic ligament. Injury. 2007; 38(11):1247–1253.
10.1016/j.injury.2007.05.019 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 11.Moneim MS, Balduini FC. Coracoid fracture as a complication of surgical treatment by coracoclavicular tape fixation: a case report. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982; (168):133–135.
10.1097/00003086-198208000-00026 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 12.Tomlinson DP, Altchek DW, Davila J, Cordasco FA. A modified technique of arthroscopically assisted AC joint reconstruction and preliminary results. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(3):639–645.
10.1007/s11999-007-0085-3 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 13.Gerhardt DC, VanDerWerf JD, Rylander LS, McCarty EC. Postoperative coracoid fracture after transcoracoid acromioclavicular joint reconstruction. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011; 20(5):e6–e10.
10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.017 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 14.Bindra J, VanDenBogaerde J, Hunter JC. Coracoid fracture with recurrent AC joint separation after Tightrope repair of AC joint dislocation. Radiology Case Reports. 2011; 6(4).
10.2484/rcr.v6i4.624 . Crossref, Google Scholar - 15.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):1628–1634.
10.1177/0363546512445273 . Crossref Medline, Google Scholar
