The sternoclavicular joint (SCJ) is a pivotal articulation in the linked system of the upper limb girdle, providing load-bearing in compression while resisting displacement in tension or distraction at the manubrium sterni. The SCJ and acromioclavicular joint (ACJ) both have a small surface area of contact protected by an intra-articular fibrocartilaginous disc and are supported by strong extrinsic and intrinsic capsular ligaments. The function of load-sharing in the upper limb by bulky periscapular and thoracobrachial muscles is extremely important to the longevity of both joints. Ligamentous and capsular laxity changes with age, exposing both joints to greater strain, which may explain the rising incidence of arthritis in both with age. The incidence of arthritis in the SCJ is less than that in the ACJ, suggesting that the extrinsic ligaments of the SCJ provide greater stability than the coracoclavicular ligaments of the ACJ.

Instability of the SCJ is rare and can be difficult to distinguish from medial clavicular physeal or metaphyseal fracture-separation: cross-sectional imaging is often required. The distinction is important because the treatment options and outcomes of treatment are dissimilar, whereas the treatment and outcomes of ACJ separation and fracture of the lateral clavicle can be similar. Proper recognition and treatment of traumatic instability is vital as these injuries may be life-threatening. Instability of the SCJ does not always require surgical intervention. An accurate diagnosis is required before surgery can be considered, and we recommend the use of the Stanmore instability triangle. Most poor outcomes result from a failure to recognise the underlying pathology.

There is a natural reluctance for orthopaedic surgeons to operate in this area owing to unfamiliarity with, and the close proximity of, the related vascular structures, but the interposed sternohyoid and sternothyroid muscles are rarely injured and provide a clear boundary to the medial retroclavicular space, as well as an anatomical barrier to unsafe intervention.

This review presents current concepts of instability of the SCJ, describes the relevant surgical anatomy, provides a framework for diagnosis and management, including physiotherapy, and discusses the technical challenges of operative intervention.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:721–31.

The results of proximal humeral replacement following trauma are substantially worse than for osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. The stable reattachment of the lesser and greater tuberosity fragments to the rotator cuff and the restoration of shoulder biomechanics are difficult. In 1992 we developed a prosthesis designed to improve fixation of the tuberosity fragments in comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus. The implant enables fixation of the fragments to the shaft of the prosthesis and the diaphyseal fragment using screws, washers and a special toothed plate. Between 1992 and 2003 we used this technique in 50 of 76 patients referred to our institution for shoulder reconstruction after trauma. In the remaining 26, reconstruction with a prosthesis and nonabsorbable sutures was performed, as the tuberosity fragments were too small and too severely damaged to allow the use of screws and the toothed plate.

The Constant score two years post-operatively was a mean of 12 points better in the acute trauma group and 11 points better in the late post-traumatic group than in the classical suture group.

We recommend this technique in patients where the tuberosity fragments are large enough to allow fixation with screws, washers and a toothed plate.

We report a randomised controlled trial to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic acromioplasty in the treatment of stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. A total of 140 patients were randomly divided into two treatment groups: supervised exercise programme (n = 70, exercise group) and arthroscopic acromioplasty followed by a similar exercise programme (n = 70, combined treatment group). The main outcome measure was self-reported pain on a visual analogue scale of 0 to 10 at 24 months, measured on the 134 patients (66 in the exercise group and 68 in the combined treatment group) for whom endpoint data were available.

An intention-to-treat analysis disclosed an improvement in both groups but without statistically significant difference in outcome between the groups (p = 0.65). The combined treatment was considerably more costly.

Arthroscopic acromioplasty provides no clinically important effects over a structured and supervised exercise programme alone in terms of subjective outcome or cost-effectiveness when measured at 24 months. Structured exercise treatment should be the basis for treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome, with operative treatment offered judiciously until its true merit is proven.