ReviewArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021
Grade III Acromioclavicular Separations Treated With Suspensory Fixation Techniques: A Systematic Review of Level I Through IV Studies.
Review in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Loss of Reduction and Clavicle Fractures Commonly Occur in Patients Undergoing Acromioclavicular Joint Reconstruction and Female Sex Is Associated With Higher Fracture Risk.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Timing of Surgical Treatment for High-Grade Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries Does Not Affect Functional Outcomes.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Clinical and Patient-Reported Outcomes for Acute Acromioclavicular Joint Fixation are Similar With or Without Allograft Augmentation.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo perform a systematic review comparing clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and complication rates after acute (surgery ≤6 weeks from injury) versus chronic (surgery >6 weeks from injury) acromioclavicular joint reconstructions for grade III injuries using modern suspensory fixation techniques.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of the literature examining acute versus chronic surgical treatment of Rockwood grade III acromioclavicular joint separations using the Cochrane registry, MEDLINE database, and Embase database over the past 10 years according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. The inclusion criteria included techniques using suspensory fixation, a minimum study size of 3 patients, a minimum follow-up period of 6 months, human studies, and English-language studies. The methodology of each study was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) tool for nonrandomized studies and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB 2) tool for randomized controlled trials.
resultsThe systematic review search yielded 20 studies with a total of 253 patients. There were 2 prospective randomized controlled trials, but most of the included studies were retrospective. On comparison of acute surgery (≤6 weeks) and chronic surgery (>6 weeks), individual studies reported a range of Constant scores of 84.4 to 98.2 and 80.8 to 94.1, respectively. The ranges of radiographic coracoclavicular distances reported at final follow-up also favored acute reconstructions, which showed improved reduction (9.2-15.7 mm and 11.7-18.6 mm, respectively). The reported complication rates ranged from 7% to 67% for acute reconstructions and from 0% to 30% for chronic reconstructions.
conclusionsThe ranges in the Constant score may favor acute reconstructions, but because of the heterogeneity in the surgical techniques in the literature, no definitive recommendations can be made regarding optimal timing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.