No differences between conservative and surgical management of acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis: a scoping review

Purpose: To conduct a scoping review to clarify the management of acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis, as well as to identify any existing gaps in the current knowledge. Methods: Studies were identified by electronic databases (Ovid, Pubmed) from their inception up to April 2nd, 2020. All studies reporting functional outcomes after conservative or surgical treatment of acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis, either primary or secondary to trauma or distal clavicle osteolysis, were included. Following data were extracted: authors, year of publication, study design (prospective or retrospective), LOE, number of shoulders treated conservatively or surgically, patients’ age, OA classification, type of conservative treatment, surgical approach, surgical technique, functional outcomes, complications, revisions, and length of follow-up. Descriptive statistics was used. Quality appraisal was assessed through the Cochrane risk of bias tool for LOE I/II studies, while the MINORS checklist was used for LOE III/IV studies. Results: Nineteen studies were included for a total of 861 shoulders. Mean age of participants was 48.5 ± 7.4 years. Mean follow-up was 43.8 ± 29.9 months. Four studies reported functional results after conservative treatment, whereas 15 studies were focused on surgical management. No studies directly compared conservative and surgical treatment. Seven studies reported a surgical approach after failure of previous conservative treatment. All studies reported functional improvement and pain relief. Complication rate was low. Overall methodological quality of included studies was very low. Conclusion: Conservative and surgical treatments are both effective in acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis management. However, available data did not allow to establish the superiority of one technique over another. Level of evidence: Level IV.