Functional outcome and return to sports after the arthroscopic latarjet procedure in young and physically active patients

Current Evidence Based Recommendations on Rehabilitation following Arthroscopic Shoulder Surgery: Rotator Cuff, Instability, Superior Labral Pathology, and Adhesive Capsulitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Arthroscopy has become increasingly popular for a addressing a wide variety of shoulder pathology. However, despite increasing interest, there is still much uncertainty and variability amongst providers regarding optimal post-operative rehabilitation. This review provides an overview of the evidence underlying common rehab protocols used following arthroscopic interventions for rotator cuff disease, shoulder instability, superior labral anterior to posterior (SLAP) tears and adhesive capsulitis.

RECENT FINDINGS

For small and medium sized rotator cuff tears, early motion protocols do not seem to affect healing or retear rates, however there is no difference with regards to long term functional outcomes when compared to standard motion protocols. For larger tears (> 3 cm), early active motion may be associated with impaired tendon integrity. Early range of motion following arthroscopic Bankart repair has not been shown to increase rate of recurrence, however the data on return to sport requires more granularity to effectively guide care. Further research needs to be done to compare rehab protocols following SLAP repair and arthroscopic capsular release. Rehabilitation protocols following rotator cuff surgery and anterior shoulder stabilization have garnered the most research interest. However, there is still a need for larger higher-level studies examining the long-term effects of different rehab protocols. Regarding the arthroscopic management of other types of shoulder instability, SLAP tears and adhesive capsulitis, there is paucity of high-quality evidence. This knowledge gap likely underpins the variability in different rehab protocols seen in clinical practice, highlighting the need for more research.

Salvage Latarjet may provide worse outcomes in terms of recurrent instability and returning to sports compared to primary Latarjet: a systematic review of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

The Latarjet procedure (LP) is performed as a primary stabilization procedure (primary LP) and a salvage procedure when an earlier shoulder stabilization procedure has failed (salvage LP). However, whether primary LP or salvage LP provides better outcomes for anterior shoulder instability remains unknown.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, web of science and Cochrane Library was performed from their inception date to December 4, 2023. Inclusion criteria mainly included the comparison of postoperative outcomes between primary and salvage LP, English language, and full text availability. Two reviewers independently examined the literature, collected data, and evaluated the methodological robustness of the included studies. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to evaluate the quality of nonrandomized studies. Recurrent instability, complications, reoperations, return to sports, patient-reported outcomes, and range of motion were assessed. Statistical evaluations were conducted using Manager V.5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Software Update, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included in the systematic review, with 940 shoulders undergoing primary LP and 631 shoulders undergoing salvage LP. Statistically significant differences in favor of primary LP were found in 2 of the 11 and 2 of 4 included studies in terms of recurrent instability and returning to the same sports (RTS) at preinjury level, respectively. In terms of the visual analog scale, subjective shoulder value and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, 2 of the 4, 1 of the 3 and 1 of the 3 included studies reported statistically significant differences in favor of primary LP. Differences were not noticed regarding complications, reoperations, the time to RTS, the Rowe score, the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System, and forward flexion.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that compared with primary LP, salvage LP may provide inferior postoperative outcomes in terms of recurrent instability and the rate of RTS at preinjury level. Primary and salvage LP may yield comparable efficacy in terms of complications, reoperations, the rate of RTS, the time to RTS, pain, shoulder function, and range of motion.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42023492027.

Arthroscopic Latarjet Versus Arthroscopic Free Bone Block Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Proportional Meta-analysis Comparing Recurrence, Complication, and Reoperation Rates

BACKGROUND

Several arthroscopic glenoid bone augmentation techniques have been introduced to treat patients affected by anterior shoulder instability associated with critical bone loss. The efficacy of the different arthroscopic bony procedures has not been compared yet.

PURPOSE

To compare the recurrence, complication, and reoperation rates of the arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) and arthroscopic free bone block (ABB) procedures for anterior shoulder instability.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis and systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE/PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase to identify clinical studies reporting the outcomes of the AL and ABB procedures. The following search phrases were used: "Arthroscopic" AND "Bone Block" OR "Bone Graft," and "Arthroscopic" AND "Glenoid Augmentation" OR "Glenoid Reconstruction," and "Arthroscopic" AND "Latarjet" OR "Coracoid Graft" OR "Coracoid Transfer." Exclusion criteria were <24 months of minimum follow-up, sample size <10 cases, revision after previous glenoid bone grafting, epilepsy, and multidirectional instability. Data regarding the study design, patient characteristics, surgical technique, and outcomes were extracted and analyzed. A proportional meta-analysis was conducted to compare the complication, recurrence, and reoperation rates between the 2 groups. Multiple subgroup analyses were performed to analyze the incidence of each complication and assess the weight of different fixation methods (in the whole cohort) or different graft types (in the ABB group). The modified Coleman Methodology Score was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Of 5010 potentially relevant studies, 18 studies regarding the AL procedure (908 cases) and 15 studies regarding the ABB procedure (469 cases) were included. The 2 groups were comparable in age (P = .07), sex (P = .14), glenoid bone loss (P = .14), number of preoperative dislocations (P = .62), proportion of primary and revision procedures (P = .95), length of follow-up (P = .81), modified Coleman Methodology Score (P = .21), and level of evidence (P = .49). There was no difference in the recurrence (P = .88), reoperation (P = .79), and complication (P = .08) rates. The subgroup analyses showed a higher rate of hardware-related complications for screw fixation compared with flexible fixation (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

The AL and ABB procedures had similar recurrence, reoperation, and complication rates. Screw fixation of the bone graft was related to an increased risk of complications compared with flexible fixation.

REGISTRATION

CRD42022368153 (PROSPERO).

Clinical outcomes, return to sport, and complications after isolated primary Latarjet versus Latarjet as a revision procedure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this review was to compare clinical outcomes, return to sport (RTS), and complications in comparative studies examining patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedure versus Latarjet in the revision setting following soft tissue stabilization.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I to III human clinical studies reporting clinical outcomes (Visual Analogue Pain Scale [VAS]), RTS metrics, and complications in patients following primary versus revision Latarjet procedures. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies, consisting of 1170 patients (n=1179 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.4 years, consisting of 91.9% males (n=1083/1179 shoulders), were identified. Mean final follow-up was 46.4 (mean range, 7.3-72.2) months. A total of 748 primary and 431 revision Latarjet procedures were analyzed. Complications were reported in 9.6% (range, 0%-24.2%) of patients undergoing primary and 20.2% (range, 0%-40.7%) in patients undergoing revision procedures (p=0.22). There was no significant difference in the RTS rate between patients undergoing primary (87.3%; range, 83.8%-92.1%) versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (78.9%; range, 60%-100%) (p=0.08). Moreover, no significant difference in postoperative VAS was observed in patients undergoing primary versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (p=0.21). Recurrent shoulder subluxation was significantly greater in patients undergoing revision (12.0%; n=31/259 shoulders; range, 0%-20.7%) compared to primary procedures (3.3%; n=27/511 shoulders; range, 0%-9%) (p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet demonstrated overall similar rates of complications and return to sport. Of clinical importance, Latarjet as a revision procedure possessed a risk of recurrent subluxation 3.6 times higher than primary Latarjet. While effective, patients should be counseled regarding the differing prognosis between Latarjet as a primary or revision procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes-A systematic review

Background

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the rate and timing of return to play in overhead athletes following operative management of anterior shoulder instability.

Methods

A systematic literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on return to play among overhead athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair, open Latarjet procedure or Remplissage procedure.

Results

There are 23 studies included with 961 patients. Among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of return to play was 86.2%, with 70.6% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 7.1 months. Among those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure, the rate of return to play was 80.9%, with 77.7% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 5.1 months. Among those undergoing a Remplissage procedure, the rate of return to play was 70.6%, with 70.0% returning to the same level of play or mean time to return to play.

Discussion

Overall, there were high rates of return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes.

The arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss shows similar clinical results after Latarjet procedure and iliac crest autograft transfer

PURPOSE

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability caused by critical bone loss of the glenoid is a challenging condition for shoulder surgeons. The purpose of this prospective multicenter trial was to compare the arthroscopic transfer of the coracoid process (Latarjet procedure) with the arthroscopic reconstruction of the glenoid using iliac crest autografts.

METHODS

A prospective multi-center trial was performed in nine orthopaedic centres in Austria, Germany and Switzerland between July 2015 and August 2021. Patients were prospectively enrolled and received either an arthroscopic Latarjet procedure or an arthroscopic iliac crest graft transfer. Standardized follow-up after 6 months and mimimum 24 months included range of motion, Western Ontario stability index (WOSI), Rowe score and subjective shoulder value (SSV). All complications were recorded.

RESULTS

177 patients (group Latarjet procedure: n = 110, group iliac crest graft: n = 67) were included in the study. WOSI (n.s.), SSV (n.s.) and Rowe score (n.s.) showed no difference at final follow-up. 10 complications were seen in group Latarjet procedure and 5 in group iliac crest graft; the frequency of complications did not differ between the two groups (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

The arthrosopic Latarjet procedure and arthroscopic iliac crest graft transfer lead to comparable results regarding clinical scores, frequency of recurrent dislocations and complication rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Return to Preinjury-Level Sports After Arthroscopic Latarjet for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability in Professional Athletes

Background

The Latarjet procedure is recommended to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. Longer return-to-sport (RTS) times have been reported after the open Latarjet when compared with the arthroscopic Latarjet.

Purpose

To assess the clinical outcomes and RTS in athletes who underwent an arthroscopic Latarjet.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

This study included 46 professional athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent an arthroscopic Latarjet between 2010 and 2016. Patients were divided by type of sport: noncollision and nonoverhead (n = 22), collision and martial arts (n = 13), and overhead (n = 11). Sport activity was evaluated with the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC) score, Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sports score, and RTS time. Clinical results were evaluated by Constant-Murley score, Walch-Duplay score, and range of external and internal rotation. Complication rates, recurrence of shoulder instability, and number of revision procedures were recorded. Correlation tests were used to assess the relationship between measured parameters.

Results

The mean ± SD patient age was 27.1 ± 7.3 years, and the mean follow-up was 50.7 ± 18 months. Overall, 44 patients (95.7%) returned to their previously practiced sports, and 40 (87%) returned to their preinjury levels. The RTS time was 5 ± 1.4 months, with no significant difference among sport types. KJOC and Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sports scores were 95.2 ± 5.6 and 9.5 ± 1, respectively. Significant pre- to postoperative improvement was seen on the Constant-Murley score (from 54.3 ± 9.4 to 87.9 ± 8.2; P = .001) and Walch-Duplay score (from 53.7 ± 7.3 to 88.1 ± 10.7; P = .001). Mean postoperative external and internal rotation was 72.8° ± 18.6° and 81.3° ± 11.3°. Procedure-related complications occurred in 10 patients (21.7%); recurrence of shoulder instability was observed in 4 (8.7%); and 4 (8.7%) underwent revision surgery. A worse Walch-Duplay score was significantly associated with longer RTS time (r = -0.39; P = .019) and lower KJOC score (r = 0.29; P = .03).

Conclusion

There was a 95.7% RTS rate after the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure, although the procedure was not free from complications.

Latarjet procedure without capsular repair produces favorable clinical results and avoids limitation in external rotation

PURPOSE

This study aimed at analyzing the range of motion (ROM) and other clinical outcomes in patients with > 20% glenoid bone loss who underwent the Latarjet procedure with or without anterior capsule repair.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 47 patients with > 20% glenoid bone loss who underwent the classic Latarjet procedure from 2016 to 2021. Of these, 25 did not undergo capsular repair (no-capsular-repair group; group I) whereas 22 patients did (capsular-repair group; group II). The Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Visual Analogue Scale, ROM, recurrence, and complications were evaluated before and 3, 6, and 12 months after the surgery. A goniometer was used to measure the forward flexion and external rotation (arm adducted, 90° abducted) of both shoulders. The ROM deficit was measured as the difference from the contralateral healthy shoulder.

RESULTS

The external rotation in arm adduction at 3 and 6 months after surgery showed significantly better results in group I than group II(p = 0.002 at 3 months; p = 0.005 at 6 months). The deficit in external rotation with arm adduction was also significantly lower in group I at 3 months (p = 0.001) and 6 months (p = 0.001) after surgery. However, external rotation with arm adduction at 12 months after surgery did not significantly differ between the groups. Moreover, the ROM in external rotation with 90° arm abduction was significantly better in group I than that in group II at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively (p = 0.002, p = 0.001, and p = 0.005, respectively). The deficit in external rotation with 90° arm abduction gradually decreased with time after surgery and differed significantly between the groups. However, the difference in deficit between the two groups at 12 months after surgery did not exceed the measurement error. All clinical scores significantly improved after surgery compared to before surgery; however, the improvement did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The Latarjet procedure without capsular repair showed good laxity restoration and clinical results with less early postoperative external rotation limitation than that achieved by the same procedure with capsular repair. However, external rotation deficit at 1 year after surgery did not show a clinically relevant difference difference between the two groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Arthroscopically Assisted Anterior Bone Block for Shoulder Instability

Background:

Shoulder instability is a common complaint, with treatment depending on the severity of the bony defect. Advancements in arthroscopic techniques have allowed for a less invasive surgery with decreased postoperative pain, improved graft placement, and better visualization.

Indications:

Large bony defects of the glenoid require bone block augmentation to reduce recurrent instability. In this presentation, arthroscopically assisted anterior bone block was performed with a distal tibial allograft to address recurrent anterior shoulder instability with a large glenoid defect.

Technique Description:

The patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position. Standard arthroscopic portals are made. The bone block is fashioned from a distal tibial allograft. Using a guide, drill holes are placed in the bone block. The guide is inserted from the posterior portal and placed parallel to the joint surface. Using drill sleeves, superior and inferior screw holes are drilled and a metal cannula is left in place to allow for shuttling of suture. Two anchors are placed on the glenoid to allow for capsule labral junction to be brought up to the graft once the graft is in place. The bone block is delivered through a dilated anterior portal and reduced. The sutures are tensioned. A button is placed on each set of looped sutures, a Nice knot is placed into each, and a tensioning device is tensioned. Once compression is achieved, knots are tied to perform final fixation over the buttons. A suture passing device is used to grab inferior capsule and labrum to the priorly placed anchor on the inferior glenoid and tied.

Results:

Arthroscopically assisted anterior bone block for shoulder instability has been demonstrated to have similar clinical and radiographic outcomes when compared with open treatment. However, arthroscopically assisted Latarjet has been shown to have decreased soft tissue disruption and possible improvements in graft placement.

Discussion/Conclusion:

Arthroscopically assisted anterior bone block is a technically demanding surgery but has been shown to have similar outcomes when compared with open treatment. In this video, we demonstrate an arthroscopically assisted anterior bone block for recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

Patient Consent Disclosure Statement:

The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

Arthroscopic Latarjet With Cortical Buttons Versus Open Latarjet With Screws: A Short-Term Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

The arthroscopic bone block procedure according to Latarjet remains a controversial subject, and few comparative studies have demonstrated the benefit of arthroscopy over open surgery.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The objective of this study was to compare both procedures by analyzing the short-term clinical results. The hypothesis was that the arthroscopic procedure is superior to the standard open procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHOD

This was a retrospective comparative study. Patients treated for chronic anterior instability by arthroscopic Latarjet with double cortical buttons (group A) or open Latarjet with screws (group O) with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were included. Intraoperative (duration, complications) and postoperative (complications, pain, mobility, functional scores, resumption of sport, Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale scar aesthetics, satisfaction) data were compared.

RESULTS

In total, 50 patients were included (n = 24 in group A, n = 26 in group O). Operating time was longer in group A (103 vs 61 min; P = .001). The average number of days on analgesics was higher in group A (8.9 vs 5.3 days; P = .04). The complication rate was similar for the 2 groups (12.5% vs 27%; P = .46). At 3 months, the loss of external rotation was greater in group A (-33° vs -18°; P = .01), and resumption of sports was less frequent (11% vs 48%; P = .01). At 12 months, the average scores were excellent, with no significants differences between the 2 groups: Walch-Duplay average, 90 points; Rowe, 94 points; Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), 92.5%; sport SSV, 85%; and Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale score, 17.2 points.

CONCLUSION

Over the short term, this comparative study did not prove the superiority of the cortical-button arthroscopic Latarjet procedure over the open Latarjet procedure. A delay in the resumption of sports, longer time to recover range of motion, and no benefit regarding postoperative pain or the aesthetic aspect of the scar were observed in this study with the arthroscopic procedure.

Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure Does Not Lead to Loss of Clinically Significant External Rotation at 0° and 90° of Shoulder Abduction

Background

Several reports have shown that shoulder stabilizing procedures lead to postoperative external rotation (ER) deficits. However, no study on arthroscopic Latarjet procedures has investigated the effect on ER when the arm is abducted at 0° (ER₀) and 90° (ER₉₀). This study examined the relationship between the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and the subsequent effect on ER₀ and ER₉₀.

Methods

Patients who underwent an arthroscopic Latarjet procedure from December 2015 to April 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Preoperative ER₀ and ER₉₀ values were obtained from the contralateral shoulder. ER₀ and ER₉₀ values from the operative side were collected at both 3 and 6 months postoperatively. A repeated measures ANOVA was performed to assess the mean preoperative and postoperative values.

Results

Forty-six patients met the inclusion criteria. Mean ER₀ for the 3- and 6-month time frames measured 44.2° and 54.6°, respectively. Mean ER₉₀ for the 3- and 6-month time frames measured 78.4° and 90.4°, respectively. Comparison to the contralateral arm at the 3-month follow-up period showed a deficit of 14.9° (P = .0001) and 17.2° (P = .0001) for ER₀ and ER₉₀, respectively. At the 6-month follow-up period, patients demonstrated an average decline in ER₀ and ER₉₀ of 4.57° (P = .063) and 5.11° (P = .008), respectively.

Conclusion

A nominal deficit in ER occurred for both ER₀ and ER₉₀ status post arthroscopic Latarjet procedure. Despite loss of ER₉₀ at 6 months achieving statistical significance, the clinical impact is arguably inconsequential. Such limited loss of ER provides more information regarding bony procedures being a more definitive treatment for glenohumeral instability and the ability to restore native motion.

Clinical outcomes following open anterior shoulder stabilization for glenohumeral instability in the young collision athlete

BACKGROUND

Anterior glenohumeral instability occurs most commonly in those aged 15-29, with 72% of individuals younger than 22 years suffering recurrent episodes; collision athletes are at particular risk. In the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss, arthroscopic Bankart repair is widely used despite concerns of recurrent dislocations when compared with open techniques. Furthermore, indications for bone-block procedures are evolving with the Latarjet procedure being favored amongst recent authors as a primary stabilization method in elite and contact athletes.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of open modified Bankart stabilization in treating anterior glenohumeral instability in young collision athletes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of outcomes of consecutive patients aged 15-20 years who underwent unilateral or bilateral open stabilization for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability over a 7-year period (2007-2015). The cohort was selected as recent literature suggests that this is the group with the highest redislocation rate and poorest outcomes. Outcome assessments included redislocation rate, return to sport, pain score, patient-related satisfaction scores, and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients (55 male: 5 female) of mean age 18 years (range: 15-20 years) were available for follow-up at 7 years. All but 3 were competitive athletes with 18 competing regionally and 9 internationally; rugby union and rugby league represent the most common sports. Fifty-five of 60 (92%) have returned to their desired level of sport with 62% of athletes returning to their previous level of competition sport and 1 retuning at a higher level. The mean postoperative pain score was 2.5/10. The mean time to return to play was 14 months (range: 5-48 months). Eight of 60 shoulders reported redislocation (13%), 7 of these being traumatic dislocations after return to high-impact sporting activities. At 7 years of follow-up, 4 of 60 shoulders (7%) had undergone revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

Young collision athletes represent a challenging cohort of instability patients. This study of open modified Bankart in young collision sport athletes revealed excellent outcomes with 92% return to sport and a low revision rate. The results from this cohort rival those of arthroscopic repair. The open procedure described here in this 7-year series represents a robust, reliable technique that could be considered as an alternative to arthroscopic Bankart due to concern for recurrence, while avoiding potential morbidity and complication of bone-block procedures. There is still a role for the open modified Bankart procedure in treating traumatic anterior instability.

Evaluation of Latarjet procedure in female athletes: a three-year follow-up prospective cohort study

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure Utilizing a Latarjet With Cortical Button Fixation Performed in the Lateral Position

Shoulder instability is a commonly seen pathology. The Latarjet procedure was first described in 1954 to address recurrent instability or patients with glenoid bone loss. Since its introduction, the procedure has been widely adopted and modified, including being performed all-arthroscopically. Various arthroscopic techniques have been described, but we present a technique performed in the lateral decubitus position that takes advantage of a pneumatic arm holder. After arthroscopic diagnosis, multiple accessory portals are established and used to accomplish the technique. Next, the coracoid is prepared and cut using a cannulated drill guide, followed by arthroscopic glenoid preparation using a cannulated drill system to ensure appropriate position of the coracoid. The subscapularis split is performed arthroscopically, and finally the coracoid is fixed with use of the EndoButton device.

Differences in Patients' and Surgeons' Expectations before Shoulder Stabilization Surgery

Purpose: The primary goal of shoulder stabilization procedures is to re-establish stability and many surgeons measure the success after shoulder stabilization surgery only by the absence of re-dislocation. However, patients might also suffer from pain, loss of range of motion and strength as well as anxiety and stigmatization and therefore have other expectations from a stabilization surgery than just a stable shoulder. Purpose of this study was to analyze if surgeons know what their patients typically expect from a shoulder stabilization surgery. Furthermore, the aim was to analyze the influence of various factors on patients’ expectations. Materials and Methods: 204 patients with a diagnosis of shoulder instability scheduled for surgical treatment were included in this prospective multicentric study. Preoperatively, objective and subjective scores were obtained and patients were asked about their postoperative expectations. Additionally, 25 surgeons were interviewed with regard to what they think their patients expect from the surgery using standardized questions. Results: With regard to postoperative expectations surveyed by the Hospital for Special Surgery questionnaire (HSS), the most important goal to achieve for the patients was ‘stopping the shoulder from dislocation’, followed by ‘to improve the ability to exercise or participate in sports’ and ‘being the shoulder to be back the way it was before the issue started’. The ranking of factors for patients was ‘stability’ as the most important to achieve, followed by ‘movement’, ‘strength’, ‘pain’ and ‘cosmetics’. For surgeons, the order was ‘stability’ (p = 0.004 **), ‘movement’ (p = 0.225), ‘pain’ (p = 0.509), ‘strength’ (p = 0.007 **) and ‘cosmetics’ (p = 0.181). There was a significant difference between patients and surgeons with regard to gaining stability at the cost of movement (p = 0.001 **). Conclusion: Patients and surgeons expectations regarding outcome after surgical shoulder stabilization procedures are quite similar with limited topics of disagreement. Generally, surgeons tend to overrate the importance of stability at the costs of other factors.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes

Background:

In athletes with recurrent shoulder instability, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are commonly indicated to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP).

Purpose:

To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with recurrent shoulder instability.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

We performed a retrospective review of patients with recurrent shoulder instability who underwent ABR and OL and had a minimum 24-month follow-up. Indications for OL over ABR in this population were those considered at high risk for recurrence, including patients with glenohumeral bone loss. The patients were pair-matched in a 1:1 ratio (OL and ABR) by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. We evaluated the rate, level, and timing of RTP, and the Shoulder Instability–Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score between procedures. Additionally we compared the recurrence rate, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the same surgery again.

Results:

Participants included 62 athletes who underwent ABR and 62 who underwent OL, with a mean follow-up of 47.7 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, SIRSI score, VAS score, SSV, or patient satisfaction. OL resulted in a significantly lower recurrence rate (1.6% vs 16.1% for ABR; P = .009) and a significantly higher Rowe score (mean ± SD, 90.5 ± 12.2 vs 82.2 ± 20.8 for ABR; P = .008). In collision athletes, there was no significant difference between ABR and OL regarding RTP rate (89.1% vs 94.5%; P = .489) or SIRSI score (70.4 ± 24.8 vs 73.8 ± 19.6; P = .426), but OL resulted in a lower recurrence rate (14.5% vs 1.8%; P = .031).

Conclusion:

ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP in athletes. However, lower recurrence rates were seen with OL.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for First-Time Dislocators in Athletes

BACKGROUND

In athletes with a first-time shoulder dislocation, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are the most commonly utilized surgical procedures to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP).

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with a first-time shoulder dislocation.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with first-time shoulder dislocation who underwent primary ABR and OL and had a minimum 24-month follow-up. Indications for OL over ABR in this population were those considered at high risk for recurrence, including patients with glenohumeral bone loss. Patients who underwent ABR were pair-matched in a 2:1 ratio with patients who underwent OL by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. The rate, level, and timing of RTP, as well as the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score were evaluated. Additionally, we compared recurrence, visual analog scale pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value, Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the surgery again.

RESULTS

Overall, 80 athletes who underwent ABR and 40 who underwent OL were included, with a mean follow-up of 50.3 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, or recurrent dislocation rate. There were also no differences between ABR and OL in patient-reported outcome scores or patient satisfaction. When collision athletes were compared between ABR and OL, there were no differences in RTP, SIRSI score, or redislocation rate.

CONCLUSION

ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP and low recurrence rates. Additionally, there were no differences between the procedures in athletes participating in collision sports.

Latarjet Cerclage: The All-Arthroscopic Metal-Free Fixation

The Bristow-Latarjet procedure has been one of the most recognized procedures for the treatment of recurrent shoulder dislocation with anterior glenoid bone loss, revision surgery after failed Bankart repair, contact and collision sport injuries, and patients with a high risk of recurrence. Open and arthroscopic approaches have recently shown similar outcomes by several authors. However, complications related to metal implants, despite being low, are still a matter of concern. We describe an all-arthroscopic Latarjet technique with a metal-free fixation method using 2 ultra-high-strength sutures, creating a cerclage construct through 2.4mm glenoid and coracoid tunnels with a final capsulolabral complex reconstruction.