Standard open acromioclavicular (AC) stabilization is associated with increased postoperative complications including deltoid injury, infection, tunnel complications, loss of reduction, and wound/cosmetic concerns. Arthroscopy may offer superior visualization and advantages that limit these risks. The aim of this prospective non-randomized study is to evaluate advantages and long-term reliability of arthroscopic AC stabilization. Methods: Thirty-two patients with acute grade III, IV and V AC dislocations underwent arthroscopic AC reconstruction with long-term assessment by clinical AC examination, Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, visual analog scale, Specific AC Score and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores. Radiographs verified conservation of initial reduction and presence of coracoclavicular (CC) ossifications. Complications, revision rate, and satisfaction were assessed and compared to the literature. Results: Mean follow-up time was 67.6 months. All clinical outcome scores improved and differences were statistically significant (P<0.001). Initial postoperative radiographs consistently showed complete reduction. Two patients experienced relapse to grade II AC dislocation without clinical implications. In total, 71.8% showed CC ossifications without functional impairment, and in 31.3% concomitant injuries were observed. Reintervention rate was 9.4%, and 96.9% of patients were satisfied with procedure outcomes. Conclusions: Arthroscopic stabilization for acute AC joint dislocations offers satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcomes, and our results show that the arthroscopic technique is reliable in the long run. We report better reduction in maintenance, fewer complications, and similar reoperation rates compared to other techniques. Level of evidence: III.

Recurrent instability remains a common cause of failure after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual mobility (DM) cups and designs with constrained acetabular liners (CAL) have both been developed to help overcome this challenge. The aim of this report is to compare safety and efficacy outcomes of both designs based on the literature. A comprehensive literature review including published evidence on the results of DM and CAL in revision THA was performed and summarized. Available literature focusing on overall survival, dislocation, loosening, intra-prosthetic dislocation (IPD), and functional outcomes were analysed. Forty-six reports including an evaluation of 5,617 total hips were evaluated were included in the review. The included studies were divided into two distinct groups based on implantation approach: i) CAL (n=15) and ii) DM (n=31). The DM group had higher overall survival rates (94.7% vs. 81.0%), lower dislocation rates (2.6% vs. 11.0%), and lower acetabular loosening rates (1.0% vs. 2.0%) compared to the CAL group. IPDs were reported in 6 studies (mean rate, 0.6%). No differences in functional outcomes were identified due to incomplete reports. Our observations reveal that designs with CAL have poorer outcomes as compared to DM cups in revision THA. Currently, the use of DM seems more appropriate since they offer lower rates of dislocations, loosening and re-revisions in the short- and mid-term. Concerns regarding the potential of increased wear in a younger, high-demand population require additional data and evaluation by long-term studies for the DM design.