Latarjet procedure versus open capsuloplasty in traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: long-term clinical and functional results

A comprehensive comparison and evaluation of surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder instability is a common clinical problem; however, conflicting evidence exists regarding optimal treatment algorithms. We perform a comparative analysis of stabilization techniques used for recurrent anterior shoulder instability to identify the one associated with the lowest rate of recurrent instability. We additionally explore how glenoid bone loss and osseus lesions affect recurrence rates.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for clinical studies comparing surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability. Two team members independently assessed all potential studies for eligibility and extracted data. Each included study underwent a risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias summary tool. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of recurrent instability, which underwent a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Additional analyses were performed relating to the degree of glenoid bone loss and the presence of osseous lesions.

RESULTS

Of 2699 studies screened, 52 studies with 4209 patients were included. Patients who underwent open Latarjet demonstrated the overall lowest rate of recurrent instability [log odds ratio (LOR) 1.93], whereas patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair demonstrated the highest (LOR 2.87). When glenoid bone loss was 10% to 20%, open Latarjet had significantly lower recurrent instability (P = .0016) compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. When glenoid bone loss increased from 0%-10% to 10%-20%, arthroscopic Bankart repair had a significantly increased rate of recurrence (P = .021). In the presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion, both open Latarjet (P = .01) and arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (P = .029) had significantly reduced recurrence rates compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. Finally, regardless of procedure, the presence of a Hill-Sachs or bony Bankart lesion was associated with an increased risk of recurrent instability (r = 0.44, P = .0003, and r = 0.40, P = .006, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The open Latarjet has the overall lowest recurrent instability and significantly lower compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair in the setting of increasing glenoid bone loss. Bone loss between 0% and 10% results in similar outcomes across all procedures.

Readability of Online Information on the Latarjet Procedure

Introduction A common complication of first-time or recurrent shoulder dislocations is bone loss at the humeral head and glenoid. Recurrent shoulder instability is often a result of bony defects in the glenoid following shoulder dislocations. In the setting of glenoid bone loss, surgical interventions are generally required to restore stability. The Latarjet procedure is a challenging operation and, due to its complexity, may be associated with operative complications. It can be difficult to explain the procedure to patients in a manner that is easily comprehensible, which may lead to confusion or being overwhelmed with information. Hence, it is important that the information available to patients is easily accessible and perceivable to allow for adequate health literacy. Health literacy is defined as the ability to make health decisions in the context of everyday life. Methods The search engines Google and Bing were accessed on a single day in the month of July 2023, searching the terms "Latarjet surgery" and "Latarjet procedure." For each term on both search engines, the first three pages were evaluated, resulting in a total of 114 websites for review. Out of these, 25 websites met the inclusion criteria and underwent further in-depth analysis through the online readability software, WEB FX. This software generated a Flesch Reading Ease Score (FRES) and a Reading Grade Level (RGL) for each website. Results In our study, the mean FRES was 50.3 (SD ±12.5), categorizing the data as 'fairly difficult to read.' The mean RGL score was 8.12 (SD ±2.35), which exceeds the recommended target. Conclusion In conclusion, the results of this study have demonstrated that the material available on the Internet about the Latarjet procedure is above the recommended readability levels for the majority of the population. Our findings align with similar studies assessing the readability of online patient information. Based on these findings, physicians should provide patients with vetted information to facilitate a better understanding of the procedure, thereby enabling patients to make more informed decisions regarding their health.

Surgeon variation in glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

Advances in the understanding and management of glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability have led to the development of alternative bony reconstruction techniques to the Latarjet using free bone grafts, but little is known about surgeon adoption of these procedures. This study sought to characterize surgeon variation in the use of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability and ascertain reasons underlying procedure choice.

METHODS

A 9-question survey was created and distributed to 160 shoulder surgeons members of the PacWest Shoulder and Elbow Society, of whom 65 (41%) responded. The survey asked questions regarding fellowship training, years in practice, surgical volume, preferred methods of glenoid bone reconstruction, and reasons underlying treatment choice.

RESULTS

All surgeons completed a fellowship, with an equal number of sports medicine fellowship-trained (46%) and shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained (46%) physicians. The majority had been in practice for at least 6 years (6-10 years: 25%; >10 years: 59%). Most (78%) performed ≤10 glenoid bony reconstructions per year, and 66% indicated that bony procedures represented <10% of their total annual shoulder instability case volume. The open Latarjet was the preferred primary reconstruction method (69%), followed by open free bone block (FBB) (22%), arthroscopic FBB (8%), and arthroscopic Latarjet (1%). Distal tibia allograft (DTA) was the preferred graft (74%) when performing an FBB procedure, followed by iliac crest autograft (18%), and distal clavicle autograft (6%). The top 5 reasons for preferring Latarjet over FBB were the sling effect (57%), the autologous nature of the graft (37%), its robust clinical evidence (22%), low cost (17%), and availability (11%). The top 5 reasons for choosing an FBB procedure were less anatomic disruption (58%), lower complication rate (21%), restoration of articular cartilage interface (16%), graft versatility (11%), and technical ease (11%). Only 20% of surgeons indicated always performing a bony glenoid reconstruction procedure in the noncontact athlete with less than 20% glenoid bone loss. However, that percentage rose to 62% when considering a contact athlete with the same amount of bone loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Although open Latarjet continues to be the most popular glenoid bony primary reconstruction procedure in shoulder instability, nearly 30% of shoulder surgeons in the western United States have adopted FBB techniques as their preferred treatment modality--with DTA being the most frequently used graft. High-quality comparative clinical effectiveness research is needed to reduce decisional conflict and refine current evidence-based treatment algorithms.

Glenoid bone augmentation: a contemporary and comprehensive systematic review of open procedures

Introduction

There is a trend towards arthroscopically treating shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency. Despite this, there remains the option for treatment through an open technique. Multiple bone augmentation options are available for recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

Objective

To provide a systematic review of recent studies for recurrent anterior shoulder instability necessitating glenoid bone augmentation specifically through open procedures using coracoid bone or free bone blocks [iliac crest bone autograft/allograft or distal tibia allograft (DTA)].

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting open glenoid bone augmentation procedures with iliac crest, tibia, or coracoid bones within 10 years. Extracted data included study/patient characteristics, techniques, prior surgeries, prior dislocations, radiographic findings, range of motion (ROM), recurrent instability, patient-reported outcomes, and complications.

Results

92 met inclusion criteria (5693 total patients). Six were studies of iliac crest bone, four of DTA, and 84 using the coracoid bone. 29 studies measured postoperative arthritis showing no development or mild arthritis. 26 studies reported postoperative graft position. 62 studies reported ROM noting decline in internal/external rotation. 87 studies measured postoperative instability with low rates. Rowe Scores with noted improvement across 31/59 (52.5%) studies were seen. Common post operative complications included infection, hematoma, graft fracture, nerve injury, pain, and screw-related irritation.

Conclusion

Despite a trend towards arthroscopic management of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency, open procedures continue to provide satisfactory outcomes. Additionally, studies have demonstrated safe and efficacious use of free bone block graft options in the primary and revision setting.

Clinical Outcomes of the Traditional Latarjet Versus the Congruent Arc Modification for the Treatment of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Meta-analysis

Background:

Few studies have compared clinical outcomes between the traditional Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability and the congruent arc modification to the Latarjet procedure.

Purpose:

To systematically evaluate the literature for the incidence of recurrent instability, clinical outcomes, radiographic findings, and complications for the traditional Latarjet procedure and the congruent arc modification and to compare results of each search.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We included studies published between January 1990 and October 2020 that described clinical outcomes of the traditional Latarjet and the congruent arc modification with a follow-up range of 2 to 10 years. The difference in surgical technique was analyzed using a chi-square test for categorical variables, while continuous variables were evaluated using a Student t test.

Results:

In total, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria: 20 studies describing the traditional Latarjet procedure in 1412 shoulders, and 6 studies describing the congruent arc modification in 289 shoulders. No difference between procedures was found regarding patient age at surgery, follow-up time, Rowe or postoperative visual analog scores, early or late complications, return-to-sport timing, or incidence of improper graft placement or graft fracture. A significantly greater proportion of male patients underwent glenoid augmentation using the congruent arc modification versus traditional Latarjet (P < .001). When comparing outcomes, the traditional Latarjet procedure demonstrated a lower incidence of fibrous union or nonunion (P = .047) and broken, loose, or improperly placed screws (P < .001), and the congruent arc modification demonstrated improved outcomes with regard to overall return to sport (P < .001), return to sport at the same level (P < .001), incidence of subluxation (P = .003) or positive apprehension (P = .002), and revision surgery for recurrent instability (P = .027).

Conclusion:

Outcomes after the congruent arc modification proved at least equivalent to the traditional Latarjet procedure in terms of recurrent instability and return to sport, although early and late complications were equivalent. The congruent arc procedure may be an acceptable alternative to traditional Latarjet for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss; however, long-term outcomes of this procedure are needed.

Outcomes are comparable using free bone block autografts versus allografts for the management of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis of "The Non-Latarjet"

PURPOSE

Glenoid augmentation using free bone blocks for anterior shoulder instability has been proposed as an alternative to or bail-out for the Latarjet procedure. The purpose of this investigation was to systematically review and compare outcomes of patients undergoing glenoid augmentation using free bone block autografts versus allografts.

METHODS

A systematic review using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases was performed in line with the PRISMA statement. Studies reporting outcomes of patients treated with free bone block procedures for anterior shoulder instability with minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Random effects modelling was used to compare patient-reported outcomes, return to sports, recurrent instability, non-instability related complications, and development of arthritis between free bone block autografts and allografts.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies comprising of 623 patients met the inclusion criteria for this investigation. There were six studies reporting on the use of allografts (of these, two used distal tibial, three iliac crest, and one femoral head allograft) in 173 patients and twelve studies utilizing autografts (of these, ten used iliac crest and two used free coracoid autograft) in 450 patients. Mean age was 28.7 ± 4.1 years for the allograft group and 27.8 ± 3.8 years for the autograft group (n.s). Mean follow-up was 98 months in autograft studies and 50.8 months for allograft studies (range 24-444 months, n.s). Overall mean increase in Rowe score was 56.2 with comparable increases between autografts and allografts (n.s). Pooled recurrent instability rates were 3% (95% CI, 1-7%; I² = 77%) and did not differ between the groups (n.s). Arthritic progression was evident in 11% of autografts (95% CI, 2-27%; I² = 90%) and 1% (95% CI, 0-8%; I² = 63%) of allografts (n.s). The overall incidence of non-instability related complications was 5% (95% CI, 2-10%; I² = 81%) and was similar between the groups (n.s). Pooled return to sports rate was 88% (95% CI, 76-96%; I² = 76%).

CONCLUSION

Glenoid augmentation using free bone block autograft or allograft in the setting of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss is effective and safe. Outcomes and complication incidence using autografts and allografts were comparable. Due to the high degree of heterogeneity in the data and outcomes reported in available studies, which consist primarily of retrospective case series, future prospective trials investigating long-term outcomes using free bone block autograft versus allograft for anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss are warranted.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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

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.

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

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.

Return to Sport After Coracoid Bone Block Transfer for Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Shoulder dislocations can be devastating for an athlete. Coracoid bone block transfer is often used for the treatment of recurrent shoulder instability.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The primary purpose of this study was to determine the rate and mean time of return to sport in athletes after a coracoid bone block transfer at the pre-operative level of competition, a lower level, or a different level. We also sought to determine how return to sport rates after a coracoid bone block procedure compared with rates after several comparator interventions. Finally, we looked to determine the post-operative clinical outcomes and complications reported after a coracoid bone block procedure.

METHODS

We systematically searched three databases (PubMed, Embase, and MEDLINE) for studies reporting return to sport after a coracoid bone block procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 52 studies (with levels of evidence ranging from II to IV) evaluating 2953 shoulders in 2888 patients were included in this systematic review. The mean rate of return to sport at any level was 88.4% (2291 of 2592 patients). However, the rate of return to the pre-operative level was 70.3% (1387 of 1974 patients). The mean time to return to sport was 5.38 months (range 21 days to 36 months). The rate of return to sport was higher after the Latarjet procedure, as compared with Bankart repair (87.0% and 75.8%, respectively). All studies showed improvements in clinical outcome measures after coracoid bone block intervention. The cumulative complication rate was found to be 6.46% (158 of 2446 patients).

CONCLUSION

Coracoid bone block transfer allows for a high rate of return to sport, although the rate of return to sport at athletes' pre-operative level is lower. The rate of return to sport after Latarjet procedure is higher in comparison with Bankart repair. Additionally, coracoid bone block transfer is associated with improvements in a number of clinical outcome measures. Common post-operative complications include non-union between bone block and glenoid, hematoma, and infection.