Comparison of Double Endobutton and Clavicular Hook Plate in Acromioclavicular Joint Disruption: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) disruptions are corrected by surgery either with an endobutton or a hook plate. The results in the long term were found to be similar in many randomized controlled trials. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis to evaluate the functional outcome and complications of double endo button versus clavicular hook plate (CHP) for ACJ disruption (Rockwood types III–VI). Materials and Methods: Two authors independently searched related articles from electronic databases (PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Web of Science) till January 26, 2022. The data were extracted from the related articles and analyzed by Stata software. For bias calculation of each study, the Newcastle–Ottawa scale and the RevMan 5.4 software were used. Results: 14 cohort studies, 2 randomized control trial studies, and 1 case–control study including patients were selected in this meta-analysis. The results of our study showed a significantly higher Constant–Murley Score (WMD 5.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.23–9.36), Visual Analog Scale (WMD− 0.63, 95% CI [−0.79, −0.46]) and University of California at Los Angeles shoulder score (UCLA) scale (WMD 3.32, 95% CI [2.87, 3.77]) for double endobutton group. At the same time, some complications like implant failure were more common in the double endobutton group. Conclusion: This meta-analysis shows better functional and clinical outcomes of shoulder joint for the treatment of acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) disruption cases (Rockwood types III–VI) with no need for secondary operation, unlike the CHP. Complications like subacromial erosion, ACJ arthrodesis, and infection rate are higher in the CHP group, whereas the chance of implant failure is higher in the double endobutton group.