Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is a relatively common injury and a number of surgical interventions have been described for its treatment. Recently, a synthetic ligament device has become available and been successfully used, however, like other non-native solutions, a compromise must be reached when choosing non-anatomical locations for their placement. This cadaveric study aimed to assess the effect of different clavicular anchorage points for the Lockdown device on the reduction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations, and suggest an optimal location. We also assessed whether further stability is provided using a coracoacromial ligament transfer (a modified Neviaser technique). The acromioclavicular joint was exposed on seven fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. The joint was reconstructed using the Lockdown implant using four different clavicular anchorage points and reduction was measured. The coracoacromial ligament was then transferred to the lateral end of the clavicle, and the joint re-assessed. If the Lockdown ligament was secured at the level of the conoid tubercle, the acromioclavicular joint could be reduced anatomically in all cases. If placed medial or 2 cm lateral, the joint was irreducible. If the Lockdown was placed 1 cm lateral to the conoid tubercle, the joint could be reduced with difficulty in four cases. Correct placement of the Lockdown device is crucial to allow anatomical joint reduction. Even when the Lockdown was placed over the conoid tubercle, anterior clavicle displacement remained but this could be controlled using a coracoacromial ligament transfer. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1657–61

The LockDown device (previously called Surgilig) is a braided polyester mesh which is mostly used to reconstruct the dislocated acromioclavicular joint. More than 11 000 have been implanted worldwide. Little is known about the tissue reaction to the device nor to its wear products when implanted in an extra-articular site in humans. This is of importance as an adverse immunological reaction could result in osteolysis or damage to the local tissues, thereby affecting the longevity of the implant. We analysed the histology of five LockDown implants retrieved from five patients over the last seven years by one of the senior authors. Routine analysis was carried out in all five cases and immunohistochemistry in one. The LockDown device acts as a scaffold for connective tissue which forms an investing fibrous pseudoligament. The immunological response at the histological level seems favourable with a limited histiocytic and giant cell response to micron-sized wear particles. The connective tissue envelope around the implant is less organised than a native ligament. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:83–8