scholarly journals Outcomes of arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction for anterior instability with greater than 20% glenoid bone defects: are Latarjet procedures absolutely indicated for these patients?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sae Hoon Kim ◽  
Whanik Jung ◽  
Sung-Min Rhee ◽  
Ji Un Kim ◽  
Joo Han Oh
Keyword(s):  
Bone Defect ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Defect Size ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Anterior Instability ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Capsulolabral Reconstruction

Background: Recent studies have reported high rates of recurrence of shoulder instability in patients with glenoid bone defects greater than 20% after capsulolabral reconstruction. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the failure rate of arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction for the treatment of anterior instability in the presence of glenoid bone deficits >20%. Methods: Retrospective analyses were conducted among cases with anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone defects of >20% that were treated by arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up (30 cases). We included the following variables: age, bone defect size, instability severity index score (ISIS), on-/off-track assessment, incidence recurrent instability, and return to sports. Results: The mean glenoid bone defect size was 25.8% ± 4.2% (range, 20.4%–37.2%), and 18 cases (60%) had defects of >25%. Bony Bankart lesions were identified in 11 cases (36.7%). Eleven cases (36.7%) had ISIS scores >6 points and 21 cases (70%) had off-track lesions. No cases of recurrent instability were identified over a mean follow-up of 39.9 months (range, 24–86 months), but a sense of subluxation was reported by three patients. Return to sports at the preinjury level was possible in 24 cases (80%), and the average satisfaction rating was 92%. Conclusions: Arthroscopic soft tissue reconstruction was successful for treating anterior shoulder instability among patients with glenoid bone defects >20%, even enabling return to sports. Future studies should focus on determining the range of bone defect sizes that can be successfully managed by soft tissue repair.

scholarly journals A Multicenter Retrospective Study With a Minimum 5-Year Follow-up Comparing Arthroscopic Bankart Repair and the Latarjet Procedure

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712094136
Author(s):  
Eran Maman ◽  
Oleg Dolkart ◽  
Rafael Krespi ◽  
Assaf Kadar ◽  
Gabriel Mozes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽  
Functional Scores

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the Latarjet procedure are surgical techniques commonly used to treat anterior shoulder instability. There is no consensus among shoulder surgeons regarding the indications for choosing one over the other. Purpose: To compare the results of the Latarjet procedure with those of ABR for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data on all patients who were treated surgically for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected at 4 medical centers. The minimum follow-up was 5 years. Data were retrieved from medical charts, and patients were interviewed to assess their level of satisfaction (range, 0-100), functional outcomes (using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score; the Subjective Shoulder Value; and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score), and quality of life (using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]). Information on return to sports activities and postoperative level of activity compared with that of the preinjury state, complications, reoperations, and recurrent instability were recorded and evaluated. Results: A total of 242 patients were included. The Latarjet procedure was performed in 27 shoulders, and ABR was performed in 215 shoulders. Patients in the ABR group had significantly higher rates of redislocation (18.5%; P = .05) and subluxation (21.4%; P = .43) but a lower rate of self-reported apprehension (43.0%; P = .05) compared with patients in the Latarjet group (3.7%, 14.8%, and 63.0%, respectively). There were 5 patients in the ABR group who underwent reoperation with the Latarjet procedure because of recurrent instability. The functional scores in the Latarjet group were better than those in the ABR group. The SF-12 physical score was significantly better in the Latarjet group than in the ABR group (98.1 vs 93.9, respectively; P = .01). Patient satisfaction and subjective scores were similar in both groups. Conclusion: These results support recently published data on the Latarjet procedure that showed its superiority over ABR in midterm stability (dislocations or subluxations). The contribution of self-reported apprehension to the broad definition of stability is not clear, and apprehension rates were not correlated with satisfaction scores or the recurrence of dislocation or subluxation.

Outcomes of the Latarjet Procedure Versus Free Bone Block Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652092583
Author(s):  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ophelie Z. Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Tracy M. Tauro ◽  
Derrick M. Knapik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Block ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Recurrent Instability

Background: Free bone block (FBB) procedures for anterior shoulder instability have been proposed as an alternative to or bail-out for the Latarjet procedure. However, studies comparing the outcomes of these treatment modalities are limited. Purpose: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior shoulder stabilization with a Latarjet or FBB procedure. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from inception to 2019 for human-participants studies published in the English language. The search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement including studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients undergoing Latarjet or FBB procedures for anterior shoulder instability with minimum 2-year follow-up. Case reports and technique articles were excluded. Data were synthesized, and a random effects meta-analysis was performed to determine the proportions of recurrent instability, other complications, progression of osteoarthritis, return to sports, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) improvement. Results: A total of 2007 studies were screened; of these, 70 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. These studies reported outcomes on a total of 4540 shoulders, of which 3917 were treated with a Latarjet procedure and 623 were treated with an FBB stabilization procedure. Weighted mean follow-up was 75.8 months (range, 24-420 months) for the Latarjet group and 92.3 months (range, 24-444 months) for the FBB group. No significant differences were found between the Latarjet and the FBB groups in the overall random pooled summary estimate of the rate of recurrent instability (5% vs 3%, respectively; P = .09), other complications (4% vs 5%, respectively; P = .892), progression of osteoarthritis (12% vs 4%, respectively; P = .077), and return to sports (73% vs 88%; respectively, P = .066). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores improved after both Latarjet and FBB, with a significantly greater increase after FBB procedures (10.44 for Latarjet vs 32.86 for FBB; P = .006). Other recorded PRO scores improved in all studies, with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Current evidence supports the safety and efficacy of both the Latarjet and FBB procedures for anterior shoulder stabilization in the presence of glenoid bone loss. We found no significant differences between the procedures in rates of recurrent instability, other complications, osteoarthritis progression, and return to sports. Significant improvement in PROs was demonstrated for both groups. Significant heterogeneity existed between studies on outcomes of the Latarjet and FBB procedures, warranting future high-quality, comparative studies.

scholarly journals Outcomes of the Latarjet procedure with minimum 5- and 10-year follow-up: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 315-329
Author(s):  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Eric D Haunschild ◽  
Derrick M Knapik ◽  
Kevin C Parvaresh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Follow Up Studies ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate mid- and long-term outcomes following the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were systematically searched, in line with PRISMA guidelines, for studies reporting on outcomes following the Latarjet procedure with minimum five-year follow-up. Outcomes of studies with follow-up between 5 and 10 years were compared to those with minimum follow-up of 10 years. Results Fifteen studies reporting on 1052 Latarjet procedures were included. Recurrent instability occurred in 127 patients, with an overall random summary estimates in studies with a minimum five-year follow-up of 0–18% (I2 = 90%) compared to 5–26% (I2 = 59%) for studies with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Overall rates for return to sports, non-instability related complications, and progression of arthritis estimated at 65–100% (I2 = 87%), 0–20% (I2 = 85%), and 8–42% (I2 = 89%) for the minimum five-year follow-up studies and 62–93% (I2 = 86%), 0–9% (I2 = 28%), and 9–71% (I2 = 91%) for the minimum 10-year follow-up studies, respectively. All studies reported good-to-excellent mean PRO scores at final follow-up. Conclusions The Latarjet is a safe and effective procedure for patients with shoulder instability. The majority of patients return to sport, though at long-term follow-up, a trend towards an increased incidence of recurrent instability is appreciated, while a significant number may demonstrate arthritis progression.

The Number of Injury Events Associated With the Critical Size of Bipolar Bone Defects in Rugby Players With Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (12) ◽  
pp. 2803-2808 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoshinori Hasegawa ◽  
Takayuki Kawasaki ◽  
Shuko Nojiri ◽  
Shogo Sobue ◽  
Takefumi Kaketa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Defect ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Critical Size ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression Analysis ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Cutoff Value ◽  
Rugby Players

Background: The size of a glenoid bone defect is responsible for reduction in shoulder stability and is correlated with the number of instability events. Biomechanical studies have suggested that it should be considered concomitantly with the Hill-Sachs lesion as “bipolar” bone defects for assessing structural degradation, but the definitive number of instability events associated with the critical size has not been investigated. Purpose: To (1) confirm that the number of instability events is the predictor of a critical size of bipolar bone defects and (2) demonstrate the cutoff value of the number of instability events for these defects in rugby players with traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: One-hundred forty-four rugby players with anterior shoulder instability underwent morphologic evaluation for glenoid and Hill-Sachs lesions by computed tomography and determination of the critical (a glenoid bone defect of ≥25% or an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion) and subcritical (a glenoid bone defect of ≥13.5%) size of bipolar bone defects. In the primary analysis, the prevalence of the critical and subcritical size of bipolar bone defects was investigated. In the secondary analysis, the authors explored the predictors for these bone defects and determined the cutoff value correlating with the critical and subcritical size of bipolar bone defects by applying receiver operating characteristic curves. Results: The primary analysis revealed that the prevalence of critical and subcritical size of bipolar bone defects was 20.8% and 61.8% of 144 shoulders, respectively. In the secondary analysis, multiple logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the total number of shoulder instability events and dominant shoulder were the significant factors associated with the critical and subcritical size of bipolar bone defects. The cutoff value for the number of instability events that correlated with critical bipolar bone defects was 6 for the dominant and 9 for the nondominant shoulder, whereas it was 4 for the dominant and 5 for the nondominant shoulder for subcritical bipolar bone defects. Conclusion: The number of shoulder instability events and the dominant shoulder were the predictors for the critical and subcritical size of bipolar bone defects for a shoulder with traumatic instability. Four injury events should herald caution when treating rugby players with shoulder instability.

scholarly journals Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability After a Failed Arthroscopic Soft-Tissue Repair Yields Comparable Failure Rates to Primary Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 155633162110306
Author(s):  
Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj ◽  
Seaher Sakha ◽  
Tushar Tejpal ◽  
Timothy Leroux ◽  
Jacob M Kirsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Background: The management of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair remains challenging. Of the various treatment options, arthroscopic revision repairs are of increasing interest due to improved visualization of pathology and advancements in arthroscopic techniques and instrumentation. Purpose: We sought to assess the indications, techniques, outcomes, and complications for patients undergoing revision arthroscopic Bankart repair after a failed index arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior shoulder instability. Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies identified by a search of Medline, Embase, and PubMed. Our search range was from data inception to April 29, 2020. Outcomes include clinical outcomes and rates of complication and revision. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess study quality. Data are presented descriptively. Results: Twelve studies were identified, comprising 279 patients (281 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.1 ± 3.8 years and a mean follow-up of 55.7 ± 24.3 months. Patients had improvements in postoperative outcomes (eg, pain and function). The overall complication rate was 29.5%, the most common being recurrent instability (19.9%). Conclusion: With significant improvements postoperatively and comparable recurrent instability rates, there exists a potential role in the use of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair where the glenoid bone loss is less than 20%. Clinicians should consider patient history and imaging findings to determine whether a more rigorous stabilization procedure is warranted. Large prospective cohorts with long-term follow-up and improved documentation are required to determine more accurate failure rates.

scholarly journals Postoperative Recurrence of Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulders With Primary Instability Compared With Recurrent Instability: Influence of Bipolar Bone Defect Size

2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-55
Author(s):  
Shigeto Nakagawa ◽  
Takehito Hirose ◽  
Ryohei Uchida ◽  
Makoto Tanaka ◽  
Tatsuo Mae
Keyword(s):  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Bone Defect ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Postoperative Recurrence ◽  
Defect Size ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Important Indicator ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽  
Primary Instability

Background: In shoulders with traumatic anterior instability, a bipolar bone defect has recently been recognized as an important indicator of the prognosis. Purpose: To investigate the influence of bipolar bone defects on postoperative recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair performed at primary instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The study group consisted of 45 patients (45 shoulders) who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair at primary instability before recurrence and were followed for at least 2 years. The control group consisted of 95 patients (95 shoulders) with recurrent instability who underwent Bankart repair and were followed for at least 2 years. Glenoid defects and Hill-Sachs lesions were classified into 5 size categories on 3-dimensional computed tomography and were allocated scores ranging from 0 for no defect to 4 for the largest defect. The shoulders were classified according to the total score for both lesions (0-8 points). The postoperative recurrence rate was investigated for each score of bipolar bone defects and was compared between patients with primary instability and patients with recurrent instability. The same analysis was performed for the age at operation (<20 years, 20-29 years, or ≥30 years) and for the presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion. Results: Bipolar bone defects were smaller in shoulders with primary instability (mean ± SD defect score, 1.4 ± 1.5 points) than in those with recurrent instability (3.6 ± 1.9 points) and were larger in older patients than in younger patients at the time of primary instability. The postoperative recurrence rate was low (6.7%) in shoulders with primary instability regardless of the size of the bipolar bone defect and the patient’s age, whereas the postoperative recurrence rate was high (23.2%) in shoulders with recurrent instability, especially among patients younger than 20 years with bipolar bone defects of 2 points or greater. An off-track Hill-Sachs lesion was found in only 1 patient in the oldest age group (2.2%) at primary instability, but it was found in 19 patients (20%) at recurrent instability, including 14 patients younger than 30 years. Among patients with an off-track lesion, the postoperative recurrence rate was significantly higher in patients younger than 20 years with recurrent instability (recurrence rates: <20 years, 71.4%; 20-29 years, 14.3%; ≥30 years, 0%). Conclusion: The recurrence rate was consistently low in patients with primary instability and was significantly influenced by bipolar bone defect size and patient age in patients with recurrent instability.

scholarly journals Risk Factors for Recurrence of Shoulder Instability after Bankart Lesion Arthroscopic Treatment

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 20-25
Author(s):  
E. A Belyak ◽  
A. A Kubashev ◽  
F. L Lazko ◽  
M. A Abdulkhabirov ◽  
K. A Ptitsyn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Suture Anchors ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Sports Activity ◽  
Risk Factors For Recurrence ◽  
High Level

Analysis of treatment results for 408 patients (17-48 years old) with posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability was performed. In all cases arthroscopic Bankart repair with the use of suture anchors was performed from 1997 to 2013. Follow up period made up 5.7±1.2 years. Recurrent instability was observed in 45 (11%) patients. Comparison of patients with and without recurrent shoulder instability enabled to identify the following risk factors: high-level of sports activity (78.0% vs 27,8%, p

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Revision Arthroscopic Capsulolabral Repair for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability With Moderate Glenoid Bone Defects: A Comparison With Primary Surgery

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 232596712110598
Author(s):  
Young Dae Jeon ◽  
Hyong Suk Kim ◽  
Sung-Min Rhee ◽  
Myeong Gon Jeong ◽  
Joo Han Oh
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Bone Defect ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Primary Surgery ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Primary Groups

Background: The optimal revision surgery for failed primary arthroscopic capsulolabral repair (ACR) has yet to be determined. Revision ACR has shown promising results. Purpose: To compare the functional, strength, and radiological outcomes of revision ACR and primary ACR for anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Between March 2007 and April 2017, a total of 85 patients underwent ACR (revision: n = 23; primary: n = 62). Functional outcome scores and positive apprehension signs were evaluated preoperatively, at 1 year, and then annually. Isokinetic internal and external rotation strengths were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 year after surgery. Results: The mean follow-up was 36.5 ± 10.2 months (range, 24-105 months). There was no significant difference between the revision and primary groups in the glenoid bone defect size at the time of surgery (17.3% ± 4.8% vs 15.4% ± 5.1%, respectively; P = .197). At the final follow-up, no significant differences were found in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (97.6 ± 3.1 vs 98.0 ± 6.2, respectively; P = .573), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (636.7 ± 278.1 vs 551.1 ± 305.4, respectively; P = .584), or patients with a positive apprehension sign (17.4% [4/23] vs 11.3% [7/62], respectively; P = .479) between the revision and primary groups. There was no significant difference between the revision and primary groups for returning to sports at the same preoperative level (65.2% vs 80.6%, respectively; P = .136) and anatomic healing failure at 1 year after surgery (13.0% vs 3.2%, respectively; P = .120). Both groups recovered external rotation strength at 1 year after surgery (vs before surgery), although the strength was weaker than in the uninvolved shoulder. In the revision group, a larger glenoid bone defect was significantly related to a positive apprehension sign (22.0% ± 3.8%) vs a negative apprehension sign (16.0% ± 3.2%; cutoff = 20.5%; P = .003). Conclusion: In patients with moderate glenoid bone defect sizes (10%-25%), clinical outcomes after revision ACR were comparable to those after primary ACR. However, significant glenoid bone loss was related to a positive remaining apprehension sign in the revision group. Surgeons should consider these findings when selecting their revision strategy for patients with failed anterior shoulder stabilization.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document