ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Midterm Functional Outcomes after Arthroscopically Assisted Stabilization for Acute Versus Chronic Type 5 Acromioclavicular Joint Injuries.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is limited and inconsistent evidence pertaining to comparative studies examining functional outcomes after acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) stabilization in either the acute or chronic setting for high-grade injuries. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of the study was to compare functional outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopically assisted ACJ stabilization for isolated acute or chronic type 5 ACJ injuries. It was hypothesized that patients would achieve similar functional outcomes at midterm follow-up. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent ACJ stabilization using coracoclavicular (CC) suspensory fixation with an additional acromioclavicular (AC) cerclage for isolated acute or chronic type 5 ACJ injuries from January 2015 to August 2021 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years were identified and their records analyzed. Chronic ACJ injuries were defined as an interval of ≥3 weeks from injury to surgery according to the International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine consensus statement and received an additional biological augmentation using a gracilis autograft. Functional outcome measures included the Constant-Murley (CM), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Nottingham Clavicle (NC) scores as well as the visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, which were compared between groups at the final follow-up. Results: A total of 82 patients (mean age at surgery, 40.3 ± 12.7 years; 54 acute and 28 chronic injuries) with a mean follow-up of 5.5 ± 2.0 years (range, 2.0-9.9 years) were included in the study. At the final follow-up, patients with acute or chronic injuries showed similar CM (acute: 85.3 ± 13.3; chronic: 85.5 ± 12.0; Conclusion: Patients who underwent ACJ stabilization using CC suspensory fixation with an additional AC cerclage for isolated type 5 ACJ injuries in the acute setting achieved similar midterm functional outcomes, satisfaction with the cosmetic appearance of the ACJ, and failure rates to those who underwent delayed surgery with additional biological augmentation using a gracilis autograft ≥3 weeks after injury.
Indexed as
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.