Skip to main content

Table 1 Overview of included studies in the meta-analyses

From: Does Weaver–Dunn procedure have a role in chronic acromioclavicular dislocations? A meta-analysis

Study

Study design, level of evidence

Mean injury to surgery (Mo)

Follow-up duration (Mo)

Subgroup

Patients, N

Mean age, Y

Gender

M/F

Fracture type

Complication

STROBE

Tauber, 2009

Prospective cohort study, II

24 (6–144)

37 (24–58)

WD

12

42.6 ±10.1

8/4

Type III: 7

Type IV: 2

Type V: 3

Superficial SWI: 1

21/22

CCR with autogenous STG

12

41.6 ±10.5

6/6

Type III: 5

Type IV: 3

Type V: 4

Superficial SWI: 0

Kumar, 2014

Retrospective cohort study, III

39

40

WD

31

42 (19–72)*

N/A

Type III: 38

Type IV: 8

Type V: 9

Superficial SWI: 3

LOR: 3

18/22

CCR with Surgilig synthetic ligament

24

N/A

N/A

Superficial SWI: 4

LOR: 1

Hegazy, 2016

Prospective cohort study, II

18.2(9–28)

27.8 (24–32)

WD

10

40.3±13.6

9/1

Type III: 10

Superficial SWI: 3

LOR: 3

17/22

CCR with autogenous STG

10

37.9±9.6

8/2

Type III: 10

Superficial SWI: 4

LOR: 0

Kocaoglu, 2017

Retrospective cohort study, III

N/A

44.9 (29–60)

WD with dynamic TightRope system

16

37.9±10.5

14/2

Type III:13

Type IV: 2

Type V: 1

Superficial SWI: 1

19/22

CCR with autologous PLG

16

41.4±8.3

13/3

Type III: 12

Type IV: 2

Type V: 1

Type VI: 1

Superficial SWI: 0

  1. WD, Open modified Weaver–Dunn procedure; CCR, coracoclavicular reconstruction; STG, semitendinosus tendon graft; PLG, peroneal longus graft; SWI, surgical wound infection; LOR, Loss of reduction
  2. *Mean age with range in all patients, subgroups data not provide