The importance of a structured failure analysis in revision acromioclavicular joint surgery: A multi-rater agreement on the causes of stabilization failure from the ISAKOS shoulder committee
Daniel P Berthold,Lukas N Muench,Pavel Kadantsev,Sebastian Siebenlist,Bastian Scheiderer,Augustus D Mazzocca,Emilio Calvo,Andreas B Imhoff,ISAKOS Shoulder Committee,Knut Beitzel,Maximilian Hinz
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jisako.2023.08.003
Abstract:Background: Acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) stabilizations are associated with a high overall failure rate with 9.5% of these patients requiring subsequent revision surgery. Consequently, understanding the specific cause of primary ACJ stabilization failure is paramount to improving surgical decision-making in this challenging patient cohort. Purpose: To (1) identify risk factors and mechanisms for failure following primary arthroscopically-assisted ACJ stabilization to highlight the importance of conducting a detailed failure analysis and to (2) establish revision strategies based on real-life cases of primary failed ACJ stabilization. Study design: Level of evidence IV. Methods: A survey was shared internationally among members of the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine (ISAKOS) shoulder committee. The survey contained failure analysis of 11 real-life cases of failed primary arthroscopically-assisted ACJ stabilization. For each case, a thorough patient history, standardized radiographs, and CT scans were provided. Participants were asked to give their opinion on bone tunnel placement, cause of failure (biological, technical, traumatic, or combined), the stabilization technique used, as well as give a recommendation for revision. Results: Seventeen members of the ISAKOS shoulder committee completed the survey. Biological failure was considered the most common cause of failure (47.1%), followed by technical (35.3%) and traumatic (17.6%) failure. The majority deemed two modifiable factors (i.e., patient's profession and sport) as well as non-modifiable factors (i.e., patient's age and time from trauma to initial surgery) to be risk factors for failure. In 10 of 11 cases, the correct fixation device was used in the primary setting (90.9%; 52.8-82.4% agreement); however, in eight of those cases, the technique was not performed correctly (80.0%; 58.8-100% agreement). In 8 of all 11 cases, the majority recommended an arthroscopically assisted technique with graft augmentation for revision (52.9-58.8% agreement). Conclusion: Biological failure and technical failure are the most common reason for failure in primary ACJ stabilization followed by traumatic failure. Besides, biological failure can be triggered by technical errors such as clavicular or coracoidal tunnel misplacement. Consequently, a detailed failure analysis including preoperative CT should be conducted on the causes of primary ACJ failure, and, if possible, an arthroscopically-assisted technique with graft augmentation should be prioritized in revision ACJ surgery. Clinical relevance: ACJ stabilizations are associated with a high overall failure rate - potentially due to biological and technical properties. When encountering failed arthroscopically-assisted ACJ stabilization, a detailed failure analysis should be conducted on the causes of primary ACJ failure. Furthermore, an arthroscopically-assisted revision stabilization is feasible in most cases.