The management of acute acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries depends on the degree of injury diagnosed by the Rockwood classification. Inadequate imaging and not selecting the most helpful imaging protocols can often lead to incorrect diagnosis of the injury. A consensus on a diagnostic imaging protocol for acute AC joint injuries does not currently exist. Therefore we conducted a systematic review of the literature considering three diagnostic parameters for patients with acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries: 1) Assessment of vertical instability; 2) Assessment of horizontal instability; 3) Benefit of weighted panoramic views. Internet databases were searched in March 2016 using the terms (“AC joint” OR “acromioclavicular joint”) AND (MRI OR MR OR radiograph OR X-ray OR Xray OR ultrasound OR “computer tomography” OR “computed tomography” OR CT). Diagnostic, prospective, retrospective, cohort and cross- sectional studies were included to compare their use of different radiological methods. Case reports, cadaveric studies, and studies concerning chronic AC injuries and clinical outcomes were excluded. This search returned 1359 citations of which 1151 were excluded based on title, 116 based on abstract and 75 based on manuscript. 17 studies were included for review and were analyzed for their contributions to the three parameters of interest mentioned above. The inter- and intra-observer reliability for diagnosing vertical instabilities of the clavicle using x-ray alone show a high level of reproducibility while for horizontal instabilities the values were much more variable. In general, digitally measured parameters seem to be more precise and reliable between investigators than visual classification alone. Currently, evidence for the value of weighted views and other additional diagnostic imaging to supplement standard x-rays is controversial. To date there is no consensus on a gold standard for diagnostic measures needed to classify acute AC joint injuries. The inter- and intra-observer reliability for diagnosing vertical instabilities of the clavicle using bilateral projections show a high level of reproducibility while for horizontal instabilities the results are much more inconsistent. There is currently no clear consensus on a protocol for image-based diagnosis and classification of acute AC joint injuries, leading to a lack of confidence in reproducibility and reliability.

Background: Although of high relevance for clinical decision making, there exists no consensus throughout the literature of the terms “acute” and “traumatic” used in the classification of rotator cuff tears. With differing definitions, the comparability of outcome studies may be limited. The aim was to provide a detailed systematic review of the definitions used in the literature and present a suggestion for a standardization in nomenclature based on the findings.Methods: Four different internet databases were searched in February 2020 using the terms (“acute” OR “traumatic” OR “trauma” OR “athlete” OR “young”) AND (“rotator cuff tears” OR “rotator cuff tear” OR “rotator cuff” OR “rotator cuff rupture” OR “supraspinatus” OR “infraspinatus” OR “subscapularis” OR “teres minor”). Prospective, retrospective, cohort and case–control studies as well as case series were included. Systematic reviews, cadaveric or laboratory studies and studies on non-traumatic or non-acute rotator cuff tears were excluded.Results: The literature search conducted 10,349 articles of which 10,151 were excluded based on the title, 119 based on the abstract and 33 based on the manuscript. A total of 46 studies were finally included for review and subsequently analyzed. Overall, there exists no consensus neither on the term “acute” nor on “traumatic” in the context of rotator cuff tears in the literature. The time span for acute injuries ranged between 2 weeks and 6 months. For traumatic injuries, only 20% of the selected studies described a specific and adequate injury mechanism in combination with adequate imaging.Conclusion: The term “acute” should be reserved for RCT showing muscle edema, wavelike appearance of the central part of the torn tendon and joint effusion, which typically requires adequate imaging within 2 weeks from trauma. Repair of acute tears should occur within 8 weeks from trauma to benefit from possibly superior biological healing capacities. The term “traumatic” should be used for a sudden onset of symptoms in a previously asymptomatic patient, triggered by an adequate trauma, e.g., a fall on the retroverted arm with an axial cranioventral force or a traumatic shoulder dislocation.

Meniscal and chondral lesions are commonly associated with anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tears, and these lesions may play a role in patient outcomes after ACL reconstruction. To determine the effects of the presence and location of meniscal and chondral lesions at the time of ACL reconstruction on patient-reported outcomes at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Patients with no prior knee surgery who underwent primary ACL reconstruction by a single surgeon between 2010 and 2014 were included in this study. Those meeting inclusion criteria were divided into the following groups based on the arthroscopic diagnosis: patients without concomitant meniscal or chondral lesions, patients with isolated meniscal lesions, patients with isolated chondral lesions, and patients with both chondral and meniscal lesions. Patient-reported outcomes (Short Form–12 [SF-12] physical component summary [PCS] and mental component summary [MCS], Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index [WOMAC], and Lysholm scale) were assessed at a minimum of 2 years from the index surgery. A total of 151 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The mean age at the time of surgery was 36.2 years (range, 14-73 years), and the mean follow-up was 3.2 years (range, 2.0-5.6 years). At the time of surgery, 33 (22%) patients had no concomitant lesions and served as the control group, 63 (42%) patients had isolated meniscal lesions, 21 (14%) patients had isolated chondral lesions, and 34 (22%) patients had both chondral and meniscal lesions. There was significant improvement in all outcome scores postoperatively for the 3 groups (P < .05 for all outcome scores). The presence of a meniscal tear and laterality of the meniscal lesion did not have a negative effect on any postoperative outcome scores. Patients with isolated chondral lesions had significantly lower postoperative WOMAC scores compared with patients without chondral lesions (P < .05). No significant differences were found for all other scores. Patients with patellofemoral chondral lesions had significantly lower postoperative SF-12 PCS and Lysholm scores than patients with tibiofemoral chondral lesions (P < .05). Patients with ACL tears achieved improved functional scores at a mean 3.2 years after ACL reconstruction. While meniscal lesions did not affect postoperative outcomes in the short term, chondral lesions were identified as a predictor for worse outcomes.

Economic pressure highlights the critical need for appropriate diagnosis and treatment of various shoulder pathologies since under-diagnosis and under-treatment can result in increased costs to society in the form of disability and lost production. On the other hand, aggressive over-treatment can further inflate already burgeoning health-care costs and potentially harm the patient. Therefore, it is crucial to distinguish the indications between operative and nonoperative management, especially in common shoulder pathologies such as rotator cuff tears, anterior shoulder instability, biceps tendinitis, lesions to the acromioclavicular joint, and proximal humeral fractures. As a result, a detailed analysis of individual risk factors for potential failures should be performed and treatment should be based on individualized care with consideration given to each patient’s particular injury pattern, functional demands, and long-term goals.