Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature

Acromioplasty is controversial. Technically, it consists in bone resection, but there is no gold-standard technique and resection is often not quantified. The aims of the present study were 1/to assess the methodological quality of studies of acromioplasty; 2/to identify reports in which acromioplas...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research surgery & research, 2021-06, Vol.107 (4), p.102900-102900, Article 102900
Hauptverfasser: Lavignac, Pierre, Lacroix, Paul-Maxime, Billaud, Anselme
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 102900
container_issue 4
container_start_page 102900
container_title Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research
container_volume 107
creator Lavignac, Pierre
Lacroix, Paul-Maxime
Billaud, Anselme
description Acromioplasty is controversial. Technically, it consists in bone resection, but there is no gold-standard technique and resection is often not quantified. The aims of the present study were 1/to assess the methodological quality of studies of acromioplasty; 2/to identify reports in which acromioplasty was quantified; and 3/to assess any correlation between clinical results and resection quantity. A systematic literature review was performed on PRISMA criteria in the PubMed, Springer and Ovid databases, including all articles in French or English referring to acromioplasty. Articles were analyzed by 2 surgeons and those with complete procedural description were selected. 1/Methodology was assessed on 3 grades according to aim of acromioplasty, intraoperative assessment of resection, and postoperative radiologic assessment. 2/Results were extracted from articles with robust methodology and quantitative data. 3/Correlations were assessed between clinical results and resection quantity. Out of the 250 articles retrieved, 94 were selected. 1/44 of these (47%) specified the aim of the acromioplasty, 53 (56%) included an intraoperative clinical assessment criterion, and 13 (14%) included postoperative radiographic assessment. Methodologic quality was insufficient in 33 articles (35%), poor in 23 (24%) and robust in 38 (40%). 2/Seven articles (7.5%) included quantitative results. 3/Three articles assessed correlation between clinical results and resection quantity, but only 1 used reproducible radiographic assessment by critical shoulder angle (CSA); this study reported a significant positive correlation between clinical results and decreased CSA. Methodology in studies of acromioplasty was largely insufficient and resection was usually not quantified. Current data to assess the usefulness of the procedure are sparse. We advocate including a Checklist for Acromioplasty Studies in the methodology of future studies. There is at present no gold-standard for assessing and quantifying acromial resection. CSA seems contributive, but other methods might be worth developing. IV; systematic review of level 1–4 studies.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102900
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506278875</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1877056821001195</els_id><sourcerecordid>2506278875</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-1f5744345c52d656c1ed8a1ef871c925e3e51f6929aab0980b685a1d82f40d6a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15ak7T5KHgRv2FBRD2HbDrFLG2zJqmy_96WruLJ0wwzz7wwD0KnBGcEE36xzlwMPqOYkmFAS4z30JxIIVLMuNz_08_QUQhrjDknOT1EszwXgghK5ujmudddtLU1OlrXJa5OtPGutW7T6BC3WfKyDRHaYWsSD58WvkYmvkPS2Ahex97DMTqodRPgZFcX6O3u9vX6IV0-3T9eXy1TU2AcU1IzURR5wQyjFWfcEKikJlBLQUxJGeTASM1LWmq9wqXEKy6ZJpWkdYErrvMFOp9yN9599BCiam0w0DS6A9cHRRnmVEgp2IDSCR2eCcFDrTbettpvFcFqtKfWarSnRntqsjccne3y-1UL1e_Jj64BuJwAGL4cXHgVjIXOQGU9mKgqZ__L_wYoOICM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2506278875</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek (Open access)</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Lavignac, Pierre ; Lacroix, Paul-Maxime ; Billaud, Anselme</creator><creatorcontrib>Lavignac, Pierre ; Lacroix, Paul-Maxime ; Billaud, Anselme</creatorcontrib><description>Acromioplasty is controversial. Technically, it consists in bone resection, but there is no gold-standard technique and resection is often not quantified. The aims of the present study were 1/to assess the methodological quality of studies of acromioplasty; 2/to identify reports in which acromioplasty was quantified; and 3/to assess any correlation between clinical results and resection quantity. A systematic literature review was performed on PRISMA criteria in the PubMed, Springer and Ovid databases, including all articles in French or English referring to acromioplasty. Articles were analyzed by 2 surgeons and those with complete procedural description were selected. 1/Methodology was assessed on 3 grades according to aim of acromioplasty, intraoperative assessment of resection, and postoperative radiologic assessment. 2/Results were extracted from articles with robust methodology and quantitative data. 3/Correlations were assessed between clinical results and resection quantity. Out of the 250 articles retrieved, 94 were selected. 1/44 of these (47%) specified the aim of the acromioplasty, 53 (56%) included an intraoperative clinical assessment criterion, and 13 (14%) included postoperative radiographic assessment. Methodologic quality was insufficient in 33 articles (35%), poor in 23 (24%) and robust in 38 (40%). 2/Seven articles (7.5%) included quantitative results. 3/Three articles assessed correlation between clinical results and resection quantity, but only 1 used reproducible radiographic assessment by critical shoulder angle (CSA); this study reported a significant positive correlation between clinical results and decreased CSA. Methodology in studies of acromioplasty was largely insufficient and resection was usually not quantified. Current data to assess the usefulness of the procedure are sparse. We advocate including a Checklist for Acromioplasty Studies in the methodology of future studies. There is at present no gold-standard for assessing and quantifying acromial resection. CSA seems contributive, but other methods might be worth developing. IV; systematic review of level 1–4 studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1877-0568</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1877-0568</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102900</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33771721</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>France: Elsevier Masson SAS</publisher><subject>Acromioplasty ; Critical shoulder angle ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>Orthopaedics &amp; traumatology, surgery &amp; research, 2021-06, Vol.107 (4), p.102900-102900, Article 102900</ispartof><rights>2021 Elsevier Masson SAS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-1f5744345c52d656c1ed8a1ef871c925e3e51f6929aab0980b685a1d82f40d6a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-1f5744345c52d656c1ed8a1ef871c925e3e51f6929aab0980b685a1d82f40d6a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102900$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33771721$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lavignac, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lacroix, Paul-Maxime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Billaud, Anselme</creatorcontrib><title>Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature</title><title>Orthopaedics &amp; traumatology, surgery &amp; research</title><addtitle>Orthop Traumatol Surg Res</addtitle><description>Acromioplasty is controversial. Technically, it consists in bone resection, but there is no gold-standard technique and resection is often not quantified. The aims of the present study were 1/to assess the methodological quality of studies of acromioplasty; 2/to identify reports in which acromioplasty was quantified; and 3/to assess any correlation between clinical results and resection quantity. A systematic literature review was performed on PRISMA criteria in the PubMed, Springer and Ovid databases, including all articles in French or English referring to acromioplasty. Articles were analyzed by 2 surgeons and those with complete procedural description were selected. 1/Methodology was assessed on 3 grades according to aim of acromioplasty, intraoperative assessment of resection, and postoperative radiologic assessment. 2/Results were extracted from articles with robust methodology and quantitative data. 3/Correlations were assessed between clinical results and resection quantity. Out of the 250 articles retrieved, 94 were selected. 1/44 of these (47%) specified the aim of the acromioplasty, 53 (56%) included an intraoperative clinical assessment criterion, and 13 (14%) included postoperative radiographic assessment. Methodologic quality was insufficient in 33 articles (35%), poor in 23 (24%) and robust in 38 (40%). 2/Seven articles (7.5%) included quantitative results. 3/Three articles assessed correlation between clinical results and resection quantity, but only 1 used reproducible radiographic assessment by critical shoulder angle (CSA); this study reported a significant positive correlation between clinical results and decreased CSA. Methodology in studies of acromioplasty was largely insufficient and resection was usually not quantified. Current data to assess the usefulness of the procedure are sparse. We advocate including a Checklist for Acromioplasty Studies in the methodology of future studies. There is at present no gold-standard for assessing and quantifying acromial resection. CSA seems contributive, but other methods might be worth developing. IV; systematic review of level 1–4 studies.</description><subject>Acromioplasty</subject><subject>Critical shoulder angle</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1877-0568</issn><issn>1877-0568</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6BzxIj15ak7T5KHgRv2FBRD2HbDrFLG2zJqmy_96WruLJ0wwzz7wwD0KnBGcEE36xzlwMPqOYkmFAS4z30JxIIVLMuNz_08_QUQhrjDknOT1EszwXgghK5ujmudddtLU1OlrXJa5OtPGutW7T6BC3WfKyDRHaYWsSD58WvkYmvkPS2Ahex97DMTqodRPgZFcX6O3u9vX6IV0-3T9eXy1TU2AcU1IzURR5wQyjFWfcEKikJlBLQUxJGeTASM1LWmq9wqXEKy6ZJpWkdYErrvMFOp9yN9599BCiam0w0DS6A9cHRRnmVEgp2IDSCR2eCcFDrTbettpvFcFqtKfWarSnRntqsjccne3y-1UL1e_Jj64BuJwAGL4cXHgVjIXOQGU9mKgqZ__L_wYoOICM</recordid><startdate>20210601</startdate><enddate>20210601</enddate><creator>Lavignac, Pierre</creator><creator>Lacroix, Paul-Maxime</creator><creator>Billaud, Anselme</creator><general>Elsevier Masson SAS</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210601</creationdate><title>Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature</title><author>Lavignac, Pierre ; Lacroix, Paul-Maxime ; Billaud, Anselme</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-1f5744345c52d656c1ed8a1ef871c925e3e51f6929aab0980b685a1d82f40d6a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Acromioplasty</topic><topic>Critical shoulder angle</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lavignac, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lacroix, Paul-Maxime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Billaud, Anselme</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Orthopaedics &amp; traumatology, surgery &amp; research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lavignac, Pierre</au><au>Lacroix, Paul-Maxime</au><au>Billaud, Anselme</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature</atitle><jtitle>Orthopaedics &amp; traumatology, surgery &amp; research</jtitle><addtitle>Orthop Traumatol Surg Res</addtitle><date>2021-06-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>107</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>102900</spage><epage>102900</epage><pages>102900-102900</pages><artnum>102900</artnum><issn>1877-0568</issn><eissn>1877-0568</eissn><abstract>Acromioplasty is controversial. Technically, it consists in bone resection, but there is no gold-standard technique and resection is often not quantified. The aims of the present study were 1/to assess the methodological quality of studies of acromioplasty; 2/to identify reports in which acromioplasty was quantified; and 3/to assess any correlation between clinical results and resection quantity. A systematic literature review was performed on PRISMA criteria in the PubMed, Springer and Ovid databases, including all articles in French or English referring to acromioplasty. Articles were analyzed by 2 surgeons and those with complete procedural description were selected. 1/Methodology was assessed on 3 grades according to aim of acromioplasty, intraoperative assessment of resection, and postoperative radiologic assessment. 2/Results were extracted from articles with robust methodology and quantitative data. 3/Correlations were assessed between clinical results and resection quantity. Out of the 250 articles retrieved, 94 were selected. 1/44 of these (47%) specified the aim of the acromioplasty, 53 (56%) included an intraoperative clinical assessment criterion, and 13 (14%) included postoperative radiographic assessment. Methodologic quality was insufficient in 33 articles (35%), poor in 23 (24%) and robust in 38 (40%). 2/Seven articles (7.5%) included quantitative results. 3/Three articles assessed correlation between clinical results and resection quantity, but only 1 used reproducible radiographic assessment by critical shoulder angle (CSA); this study reported a significant positive correlation between clinical results and decreased CSA. Methodology in studies of acromioplasty was largely insufficient and resection was usually not quantified. Current data to assess the usefulness of the procedure are sparse. We advocate including a Checklist for Acromioplasty Studies in the methodology of future studies. There is at present no gold-standard for assessing and quantifying acromial resection. CSA seems contributive, but other methods might be worth developing. IV; systematic review of level 1–4 studies.</abstract><cop>France</cop><pub>Elsevier Masson SAS</pub><pmid>33771721</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102900</doi><tpages>1</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1877-0568
ispartof Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research, 2021-06, Vol.107 (4), p.102900-102900, Article 102900
issn 1877-0568
1877-0568
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2506278875
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek (Open access); Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Acromioplasty
Critical shoulder angle
Systematic review
title Quantification of acromioplasty. Systematic review of the literature
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-10T20%3A03%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quantification%20of%20acromioplasty.%20Systematic%20review%20of%20the%20literature&rft.jtitle=Orthopaedics%20&%20traumatology,%20surgery%20&%20research&rft.au=Lavignac,%20Pierre&rft.date=2021-06-01&rft.volume=107&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=102900&rft.epage=102900&rft.pages=102900-102900&rft.artnum=102900&rft.issn=1877-0568&rft.eissn=1877-0568&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102900&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2506278875%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2506278875&rft_id=info:pmid/33771721&rft_els_id=S1877056821001195&rfr_iscdi=true