Open Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure for the Treatment of Chronic Anterior Glenohumeral Instability With Glenoid Bone Loss

Splitting the subscapularis at the upper two-third and lower one-third junction or in the middle during the Latarjet-Walch procedure does not affect the external rotation range of motion

BACKGROUND

Our purpose was to investigate (1) the difference in external rotation range of motion (ROM) limitation between the two recommended subscapularis-splitting techniques (mid-split vs. upper 2/3rd -lower 1/3rd split) and (2) the differences in elevation ROM, internal rotation (IR) ROM, the functional outcomes and the IR strength between the two techniques in the Latarjet-Walch procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients with recurrent shoulder instability treated by the Latarjet-Walch procedure between January 2021 and January 2022. After a priori calculation of sample size, 32 patients were divided into two groups according to the type of intraoperative subscapularis split [upper 2/3rd -lower 1/3rd level split (LS group, n = 19) vs. mid-LS (MS group, n = 13)] performed in the Latarjet-Walch procedure.

RESULTS

The final external rotation with the arm adducted deficit (as compared to opposite normal shoulder) was not significantly different between the LS (9° ± 8°) and the MS (10° ± 8°, P = .8) groups. The final ER with the elbow abducted @ 90° (ER2) deficit was not significantly different between that of the LS (14° ± 12°) and the MS groups (12° ± 9°, P = .5). Only in the MS group were the final ER with the arm adducted deficit (P = .03) and the final ER with the elbow abducted @ 90° deficits (P = .05) significantly better (smaller) than the corresponding baseline values. The Rowe scores (P = .2) and the Shoulder Subjective Value (P = .7) were not significantly different between the two groups. There were no postoperative subluxations in either group. However, 3 patients tested positive in apprehension testing in the LS group compared to none in the MS group, the difference being statistically insignificant. The IR strength was 95% of the normal, unaffected shoulder in the LS group and 93% of the normal in the MS group (P = .6). Computed tomography scan evaluation showed that the transverse diameter index of subscapularis (upper subscapularis diameter/lower subscapularis diameter) was not different in the MS (0.9 ± 0.1) and the LS (0.9 ± 0.1, P = .3) groups.

CONCLUSION

We found no difference in final external rotation limitation between the upper 2/3rd - lower 1/3rd vs. mid-level subscapularis split techniques. The functional outcomes, the IR strength, subscapularis transverse diameter index, and fatty infiltration in the computed tomography scan were similar in both groups.

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).

Current Trends and Outcomes for Open vs. Arthroscopic Latarjet

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper aims to analyze and compare the existing research on open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for treating anterior shoulder instability. The review will assess different factors such as graft positioning, functional outcomes, complications, and return-to-play rates for both approaches. The study's primary goal is to establish which technique yields superior outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have suggested that arthroscopic Latarjet surgery can produce outcomes similar to open surgery regarding functional scores and patient satisfaction. Some research indicates that arthroscopy may even provide slightly better results. Both techniques have similar complication rates, but arthroscopy requires a longer learning curve and operating time. It is crucial to ensure the proper placement of the graft, and some studies suggest that arthroscopy may be better at achieving accurate positioning. Both open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures are equally effective in treating shoulder instability. While arthroscopy offers a faster recovery time and causes less soft tissue damage, it requires surgeons to undergo a steeper learning curve. The optimal graft position for both techniques is still debated. More long-term data is needed to establish superiority. Future research should compare approaches in larger cohorts and identify outcome-affecting factors to improve the treatment of shoulder instability. Both techniques are promising, but arthroscopy may be a better option as the procedure evolves into a less invasive reconstruction.

Faster strength recovery and better strength ratio with arthroscopic Latarjet compared to the open technique: An observational study

INTRODUCTION

The arthroscopic bone block has shown reliability and reproducibility regarding functional scores and shoulder mobility compared to the open bone block technique. The recovery of muscle strength, especially the strength ratio external rotator/internal rotator (ER/IR), is crucial to recovering satisfactory function. This ratio should be as near to 1 as possible, meaning a good strength balance. Little is known about the difference in strength recovery between the open and arthroscopic techniques.

HYPOTHESIS

Arthroscopic Latarjet reduces surgical stress and improves the strength recovery and strength ratio.

OBJECTIVES

To compare arthroscopic and open Latarjet procedures for shoulder muscle strength and functional outcomes.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

It was an observational longitudinal and prospective cohort follow-up. Two groups of patients were accessible for comparison: 35 in an arthroscopy group and 38 in an open group. The main outcome was the muscle strength of shoulder muscles measured with a dynamometer and expressed in Newton (N) at day 21 (D21), D45, D90, D180, and D365 in the operated and contralateral shoulders. The measurements were made for the pectoralis major, the three deltoid fascicles, and the subscapularis. The shoulder ER/IR strength ratio was calculated. Other variables were the range of motion (ROM), the Walch-Duplay (WD), the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score (WOSI), and the Visual Analogic Scale for pain assessment. The strength, ROM, and functional scores were compared between open and arthroscopy with linear mixed models.

RESULTS

The median strengths at 52 weeks were significantly higher than at 3 weeks (P<10-4): anterior deltoid (AD) 8N (Q1:7, Q3: 9) versus 4N (Q1:2, Q3: 5), lateral deltoid (LD) 9N (Q1:9, Q3: 11) versus 6N (Q1:4, Q3: 7), posterior deltoid (PD) 14N (Q1:12, Q3: 15) versus 9N (Q1:8, Q3: 10), subscapularis 10N (Q1:9, Q3: 12) versus 7N (Q1:5, Q3: 8), and pectoralis major (PM) 11N (Q1:9, Q3: 12) versus 7N (Q1:5, Q3: 10). The overall strengths were lower in the open group compared to the arthroscopy group: AD -2.1N (CI95%[-3.1--1.2], p=0.0005), LD -1.3N (CI95% [-2.4--0.15], p=0.03), PD -0.35N (CI95% [-1-0.9], p=0.52), subscapularis -2.1N (CI95% [-3.3--0.7], p=0.006), and PM -1.4N (CI95% [-2.2--0.02], p=0.03). The ER/IR ratio was stable throughout the follow-up for both the operated and contralateral shoulders (p>0.5). The overall mean ratio was 1.3 (median 1.2, Q1: 1, Q3:1.45) for the operated shoulder and 1.1 (median 1, Q1: 0.9, Q3:1.3) for the contralateral shoulder (p=0.0004). The average ER/IR ratio was 0.27 points higher in the open group (CI95% [0.1-0.46], p=0.003). The ROM was similar between the two groups, and there was no correlation between the ER/IR ratio and the ROM (p>0.5). The VAS < 3 weeks and WD > 12 weeks were significantly poorer in the open group: +0.61 (CI95% [0.03-1.16] p=0.02), and -7.3 points (CI95% [-13--0.01], p=0.05), on average, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The patients in the arthroscopy group had a better ER/IR strength ratio (closer to 1) and better WOSI after 12 weeks. The strength and the ROM were not correlated with each other.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Postoperative Radiographic Outcomes Following Primary Open Coracoid Transfer (Bristow-Latarjet) Vary in Definition, Classification, and Imaging Modality: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze radiographic outcomes by conventional radiography, computed tomography (CT), or both and complication rates of open coracoid transfer at a minimum of 12-months follow-up.

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, using PubMed, Medline (Ovid), and EMBASE library databases. Inclusion criteria were clinical studies reporting on open Latarjet as the primary surgical procedure(revision coracoid transfer after failed prior stabilization excluded) with postoperative radiographic outcomes at a minimum mean 1-year follow-up. Patient demographics, type of postoperative imaging modality, and radiographic outcomes and complications including graft union, osteoarthritis, and osteolysis were systematically reviewed. Data were summarized as ranges of reported values for each outcome metric. Each radiographic outcome was graphically represented in a Forest plot with point estimates of the incidence of radiographic outcomes with corresponding 95% confidence intervals and I2.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 1,456 shoulders. The most common postoperative imaging modality was plain radiography only (n = 848 [58.2%]), both CT and radiography (n = 287 [19.7%]), and CT only (n = 321 [22.1%]). Overall, the reported graft union rate ranged from 75% to 100%, of which 79.8% (n = 395) were detected on plain radiography. The most common reported postoperative radiographic complications after the open coracoid transfer were osteoarthritis (range, 0%-100%, pooled mean 28%), graft osteolysis (range, 0%-100%, pooled mean 30%), nonunion (range, 0%-32%, pooled mean 5.1%), malpositioned graft (range, 0%-75%, pooled mean 14.75%), hardware issues (range, 0%-9.1%, pooled mean 5%), and bone block fracture (range, 0%-8%, pooled mean 2.1%). Graft healing was achieved in a majority of cases (range, 75%-100%).

CONCLUSION

Postoperative radiographic outcomes after open coracoid transfer vary greatly in definition, classification, and imaging modality of choice. Greater consistency in postoperative radiographic outcomes is essential to evaluate graft healing, osteolysis, and nonunion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III-IV studies.

Isolated Primary Latarjet Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in High Rates of Graft Resorption and Glenohumeral Degenerative Changes With Low Rates of Failure at a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To evaluate the incidence of postoperative complications after an isolated primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with 2020 PRISMA guidelines. EMBASE, Scopus, and PubMed databases were queried from database inception through September 2022. The literature search was limited to human clinical studies reporting on postoperative complications and adverse events after a primary Latarjet procedure with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Risk of bias was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies, consisting of 1,797 patients (n = 1,816 shoulders), with a mean age of 24 years were identified. The overall postoperative complication rate ranged from 0% to 25.7%, with the most common complication being persistent shoulder pain (range: 0%-25.7%). Radiological changes included graft resorption (range: 7.5%-100%) and glenohumeral degenerative changes (range: 0%-52.5%). Recurrent instability following surgery was documented in 0% to 35% of shoulders, while the incidence of bone block fractures ranged from 0% to 6% of cases. Postoperative nonunion, infection, and hematomas had a reported incidence rate ranging from 0% to 16.7%, 0% to 2.6%, and 0% to 4.4%, respectively. Overall, 0% to 7.5% of surgeries were reported failures, and 0% to 11.1% of shoulders required reoperation, with a revision rate ranging from 0% to 7.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of complications following the primary Latarjet procedure for shoulder instability was variable, ranging from 0% to 25.7%. High rates of graft resorption, degenerative changes, and nonunion were present while failure and revision rates remained low at a minimum 2-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level I-III studies.

Arthroscopic Latarjet yields better union and prevention of instability compared to arthroscopic bony Bankart repair in shoulders with recurrent anterior instability: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To determine whether arthroscopic Latarjet procedure or arthroscopic bony Bankart repair provide better outcomes in terms of rates of recurrent instability, non-union and complications, as well as clinical scores and range of motion.

METHODS

An electronic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase®, and Cochrane databases, applying the following keywords: "Arthroscopic bony Bankart" OR "Arthroscopic osseous Bankart" AND "Arthroscopic Latarjet" OR "Arthroscopic coracoid bone block".

RESULTS

The systematic search returned 1465 records, of which 29 were included (arthroscopic bony Bankart repair, n = 16; arthroscopic Latarjet, n = 13). 37 datasets were included for data extraction, on 1483 shoulders. Compared to arthroscopic Latarjet, arthroscopic bony Bankart repair had significantly higher instability rates (0.14; CI 0.10-0.18; vs 0.04; CI 0.02-0.06), significantly lower union rates (0.63; CI 0.28-0.91 vs 0.98; CI 0.93-1.00), and significantly lower pain on VAS (0.42; CI 0.17-0.67 vs 1.17; CI 0.96-1.38). There were no significant differences in preoperative glenoid bone loss, follow-up, complication rate, ROWE score, ASES score, external rotation, and anterior forward elevation between arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic bony Bankart repair.

CONCLUSION

Compared to arthroscopic Latarjet, arthroscopic bony Bankart repair results in significantly (i) higher rates of recurrent instability (14% vs 4%), (ii) lower union rates (63% vs 98%), but (iii) slightly lower pain on VAS (0.45 vs 1.17). There were no differences in complication rates, clinical scores, or postoperative ranges of motion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Arthroscopic Latarjet procedure: current concepts and surgical techniques

The Latarjet procedure is a surgical procedure that can effectively restore glenohumeral stability, especially in patients with anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss. Many studies have shown comparable clinical outcomes between patients undergoing the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and those undergoing traditional open methods or other glenohumeral joint stabilization procedures. However, the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is a challenging technique due to the unfamiliar portal placements, proximity of neurovascular structures, and serious postoperative complications. The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure has not yet been widely applied, and a clear understanding of the anatomical structure and the precise methods is required prior to operation performance. Satisfactory clinical outcomes can be achieved by thorough preoperative planning and proper implant fixation methods.

Effect of open versus minimally invasive surgery on postoperative wound site complications in patients with recurrent shoulder instability: A meta-analysis

The Latarjet procedure is the accepted method of operation for patients with anterior shoulder instability. However, as arthroscopy becomes more and more popular, more and more patients are being treated with minimally invasive techniques for the treatment of anteriorly unstable shoulder. This research aims to compare the curative effects of arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) and open Latarjet (OL) on postoperative anterior shoulder instability. Our hypothesis is that arthroscopy will produce better results than open surgery. During the study, a review was conducted on four main databases, including EMBASE and Cochrane Library. Six cohort studies comparing AL with OL in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability were included. Patients who were operated by open technique up to 2023 were referred to as OL and those who underwent arthroscopic surgery were referred to as AL. Comparison was made between the two methods of operation. The statistical analysis was done with RevMan 5.3. The analysis included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores and postoperative wound infections. A total of six studies were included for analysis under inclusion and exclusion criteria. There were 798 patients, 476 was AL group and 322 was OL group. No statistical significance was found on the incidence of postoperative wound infection in the patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure (odds ratio [OR], 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-7.31; p = 0.67) and the VAS score after surgery (mean difference [MD], 0.70; 95% CI, -0.67 to 2.06; p = 0.32) for patients. However, it has now been demonstrated that arthroscopy is a safe and viable alternative. The only drawback of arthroscopic Latarjet surgery is probably that it has a long learning curve and requires a lot of practice from the surgeon.

Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability Treated Using the Arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet Technique: Experience of a Peripheral Hospital

The arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet procedure is used in the surgical management of anterior shoulder instability. This technique is mainly performed in referral centers due to its high technicity. This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes in a peripheral hospital center. This is a retrospective study of patients treated for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The clinical scores (Walch-Duplay, Rowe, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI)) were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months after surgery. The consolidation and the position of the bone block were evaluated at 6 months using a CT scan. Between 2016 and 2020, 40 patients had been operated on (mean age: 28.5 ± 7.9 years). During a mean follow-up of 29.5 ± 11.6 months, we noted only one complication, a case of fracture of the callus of a consolidated bone block. No recurrence of instability was recorded. The Walch-Duplay score increased from 17.8 to 94.6, the Rowe score from 24.9 to 96.8, and the WOSI score decreased from 52.1% to 6.9%. The bone block was consolidated in 35 patients (87.5%), and a flush position with the anterior edge of the glenoid was noted for all patients. At one year, 67.0% of the patients practicing sport had returned to sports. The arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet technique was a reliable procedure in the hands of an experienced shoulder surgeon, even in a peripheral hospital center.

Open Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

The open Latarjet (OL) procedure and arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) procedure are able to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability (RASI) with high success rates.

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and postoperative revisions and complications between the OL and AL procedures in the treatment of RASI.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to retrieve and include cohort studies comparing the OL and AL procedures for RASI. Clinical outcomes were compared, and results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs.

Results

Eleven clinical trials with 1217 patients were included. There were no differences between the procedures in pain score, Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score, external rotation, persistent apprehension, instability, recurrence, revisions attributed to recurrent instability, overall complications, wound infection, hematoma, graft complications, screw-related complications, or osteoarthritis. When compared with the OL procedure, the AL procedure had a significantly lower nonunion rate (OR, 9.92; 95% CI, 1.71 to 57.71; P = .01); however, the AL procedure had a longer operation time (MD, -24.49; 95% CI, -48.44 to -0.54; P = .05), lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (MD, 97.27; 95% CI, 21.91 to 172.63; P = .01), higher revision rate (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.95; P = .04), and greater screw deviation (MD, -6.41; 95% CI, -10.25 to -2.57; P = .001).

Conclusion

For most outcome measures, no difference was seen between the OL and AL procedures. The AL procedure had a lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score and a higher revision rate and appeared to have a significant learning curve. However, the AL procedure resulted in a lower nonunion rate.

Arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and suture-button fixation: can we predict nonunion early?

BACKGROUND

The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is a technically challenging technique that provides well-known results. The first series reported fixation with screws. An alternative fixation technique has been proposed, using a button, to improve the reproducibility and to decrease the complications due to screws. The first reports using this fixation technique have yielded comparable rates of fusion. The objective of this study was to assess the fusion rate and bone modifications with this type of fixation.

METHODS

Two hundred sixteen patients were included in this prospective study. An arthroscopic Latarjet procedure, fixed with 1 button according to the Smith & Nephew technique, was performed by a single surgeon for the treatment of anterior instability. The radiographic protocol consisted of computed tomography scans at 3, 12, and 24 weeks postoperatively. We measured the coronal and sagittal positions of the bone block, distance between the bone block and the glenoid, diameter of the glenoid tunnel, fusion rate, and time to fusion.

RESULTS

The position was deemed flush in 92.6% of cases in the coronal plane and under the equator in 87.5% of cases in the sagittal plane. At last follow-up, we observed 9 cases of nonunion (4%), as well as 18 cases of delayed fusion. The fusion rate was 92% at 3 months and 96% at 6 months. For bone blocks that ultimately healed, the diameter of the glenoid tunnel was <2 mm in 62% of cases at 3 weeks and <1 mm in 90% of cases at 3 months. Conversely, the diameter of this tunnel significantly increased and was >3 mm in all cases of delayed union or nonunion.

CONCLUSION

The described technique achieved a reliable position of the bone block and a very good fusion rate with a new type of fixation. The time to obtain fusion can be lengthy, occurring between the third and sixth months. The diameter of the glenoid tunnel was the best predictive factor for fusion. Widening of the glenoid tunnel diameter >3 mm during the first 3 weeks was the most predictive factor for delayed union or nonunion of the bone block. This finding is probably explained by a sliding effect of the sutures through this tunnel, comparable to the bungee effect in anterior cruciate ligament repair in the knee.

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.

Functional Deficits After Open Latarjet Procedure and Dominance of the Operated Shoulder: An Analysis of 133 Patients

BACKGROUND

Return to sport after stabilization surgery using the open Latarjet procedure remains challenging. Additional knowledge is needed about postoperative shoulder functional deficits in order to better design return-to-sport programs.

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects of the dominance status of the operated shoulder on the shoulder functional profile recovery at 4.5 months after open Latarjet procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was performed. All patients who underwent the open Latarjet procedure between December 2017 and February 2021 were eligible for the study. Functional assessment at 4.5 months after the surgery was performed using the following tests: maximal voluntary isometric contractions in glenohumeral internal and external rotation, upper-quarter Y balance test, unilateral seated shot-put test, and modified closed kinetic chain upper extremity stability test, leading to 10 outcome measures. Patients whose dominant side had undergone surgery and those whose nondominant side had undergone surgery were compared with a group of 68 healthy control participants.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients who underwent an open Latarjet procedure on the dominant side and 61 patients who underwent open Latarjet on the nondominant side were compared with 68 healthy control athletes. In patients whose dominant shoulder had undergone surgery, significant deficits for the dominant side (P < .001) and for the nondominant side (P < .001) were found in 9 of 10 functional outcome measures. Among patients whose operations were on the nondominant shoulder, significant deficits for the nondominant side (P < .001) and for the dominant side (P < .001) were found in 9 and 5 of the 10 functional outcome measures, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Regardless of dominance of the stabilized shoulder, persistent deficits in strength, stability, mobility, power, and stroke frequency were observed at 4.5 months postoperatively. Stabilization of the dominant shoulder resulted in residual surgery-related functional impairments on both sides. However, stabilization of the nondominant shoulder resulted in impairments primarily noted in the nondominant, operative shoulder.

REGISTRATION

NCT05150379 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Early Treatment of Shoulder Pathology Is Necessary but Not Enough Is Being Performed

Delayed treatment of shoulder instability results in bone loss requiring more-complicated surgery, in turn resulting in less-optimal outcomes. Similarly, delayed treatment of repairable rotator cuff tears results in irreparable tears requiring more-complicated surgery and resulting in less-optimal outcomes. Delayed treatment of shoulder pathology is a problem. Solutions include education and research investigation.

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.

Biomechanical comparison between various screw fixation angles for Latarjet procedure: a cadaveric biomechanical study

BACKGROUND

The Latarjet procedure is a reliable treatment for the management of anterior glenohumeral instability with glenoid bone loss. However, the biomechanical properties of different fixation angles between screw and glenoid surface (α angle) have rarely been studied. The aim of the study was to investigate and compare the fixation stability, failure load, and failure mechanism between different α angles for Latarjet procedures, which were performed on cadaver specimens.

METHODS

Twenty-four shoulder specimens (8 in each of 3 groups) were dissected free of all soft tissue, and a 25% glenoid defect was created. The coracoid process was osteomized and fixed with 2 screws at 3 different α angles: 0° (group A), 15° (group B), and 30° (group C). Specimens were mounted to a testing apparatus, and cyclic loading (100 cycles at 1 Hz) was applied with a staircase protocol (50, 100, 150, and 200 N). Gross graft displacement and interface displacement were measured. The ultimate failure loads and failure mechanisms were recorded.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in gross displacement under any cyclic load between 3 groups. However, a significant larger interface displacement was noted in group C than in group A in 150-N cyclic loading (P = .017). Under failure strength testing, all 24 specimens failed because of screw cutout from the glenoid, and the ultimate failure load was similar among the three groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the 0° α angle, the displacement after cyclic loading did not significantly increase when the α angle was increased to 15° but significantly increased at 30° for Latarjet procedures, which were performed on cadaver specimens. The results suggest that surgeons should apply the screws as parallel as possible to the glenoid surface when performing the Latarjet procedure. Although mild deviation may not reduce fixation stability, α angles greater than 30° should be avoided.

Treatment of anterior shoulder instability: a bibliometric analysis

PURPOSE

The treatment of anterior shoulder instability is a focus in the field of sports medicine. While much research has been conducted, few bibliometric studies have been performed in this field. This study analyzed the main characteristics and identified emerging research trends and hotspots related to the treatment of anterior shoulder instability over the past four decades.

METHODS

We searched for (anterior shoulder instability OR anterior shoulder dislocation) AND (treatment OR reconstruction) in ARTICLE (Mesh) in the Web of Science database from 1980 to 2020. We analyzed the keywords, author, institution, country, number of citations, average number of citations, publication year, and partnership of the identified articles. Information about annual publications was analyzed using Microsoft Excel 2019; the remaining data were analyzed using VOSviewer version 1.6.11 (Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands) and CiteSpace version 5.7.R2 (Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 1964 articles were published between 1980 and 2020. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, the United States, the United States Department of Defense, and Arcieio were journals, countries, institutions, and authors with the highest numbers of publications. The topic hotspots were instability, shoulder, and dislocation, while the research frontiers were arthroscopic, Bankart repair, Latarjet procedure, risk factors, recurrence, and complications.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of anterior shoulder instability has shown an increasing number of publications each year and achieved great progress. The United States made the most outstanding contributions to this important field. Arthroscopic, Bankart repair, and Latarjet procedures were research hotspots and risk factors, recurrence, and complications were likely to research frontiers.

Effect of Modified Arthroscopic Latarjet on Acromiohumeral Distance at 5-Year Follow-up

Background:

It is unclear whether coracoacromial ligament release during the Latarjet procedure will increase superior translation of the shoulder joint.

Purpose:

To evaluate whether a modified suture button Latarjet procedure can decrease the acromiohumeral distance (AHD).

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A retrospective analysis was conducted among 155 patients who underwent a modified suture button Latarjet procedure between 2013 and 2015. AHD was measured on bilateral computed tomography scans taken preoperatively and on scans of the affected shoulder taken on postoperative day 1 and postoperative month (POM) 6, POM 36, and POM 60. At each time point, we recorded pain on a visual analog scale (VAS) and objective shoulder function using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Rowe, and Walch-Duplay scores. Preoperative and final follow-up VAS and functional scores were compared using the paired t test. Pairwise comparison of AHD values at each follow-up time point were compared with the preoperative intact side using the paired t test. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of the AHD measurements was evaluated using the intraclass correlation coefficient.

Results:

A total of 104 patients who met the criteria completed the final follow-up, which occurred at 62.6 ± 2.4 months (mean ± SD). When compared with presurgery, the VAS and all functional scores improved significantly at the last follow-up (P < .001 for all). Intra- and interobserver intraclass correlation coefficients indicated good reliability for the ADH measurements. Preoperatively, there were no differences in AHD values between the intact and affected shoulders (7.8 ± 0.8 mm for both; P = .851). The AHD values at postoperative day 1 and POM 6, POM 36, and POM 60 were 9.6 ± 0.7 mm, 8.6 ± 0.9 mm, 8.0 ± 0.8 mm, and 7.9 ± 0.8 mm, respectively, all of which were larger than those of the preoperative intact side (P < .001 for all).

Conclusion:

The modified suture button Latarjet procedure not only offered satisfactory therapeutic effects but also did not decrease the AHD at 5-year follow-up.

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.

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.

Short-Term Bone Fusion With Arthroscopic Double-Button Latarjet Versus Open-Screw Latarjet

BACKGROUND

Recently, arthroscopic double-button Latarjet (AL) has provided an alternative to conventional open Latarjet (OL) in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. Therefore, theoretically, the faster fusion is obtained, the sooner return to sports under safe conditions can occur. The emerging flexible fixation of the bone block has clearly offered a new approach to achieve bone fusion. However, the period required to achieve this goal remains controversial.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose was to compare computed tomography (CT) scan results of AL and OL in the early postoperative period. It was hypothesized that the bone block fusion with AL would require a longer time than that with OL.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

In a retrospective 1-year study, the authors compared 17 primary double-button AL to 22 primary 2-screw OL procedures indicated for anterior shoulder instability in patients with an Index Severity Instability Score >3 points. These patients were reviewed with a CT scan at 1 day, 3 months, and 6 months postoperatively. The characteristics for the 2 groups were comparable. CT scans aimed to analyze graft position, bone contact area with the scapula, and fusion at 3 and 6 months. Clinical assessment was based on the Walch-Duplay and Rowe scores.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative Index Severity Instability Score was 5.3 ± 1.9 points, with a mean anterior glenoid bone loss of 9.1% ± 4.6%. At 3 months, the rates of fusion were 41% and 100% for the AL and OL groups, respectively (P < .001). This rate increased to 70% in the AL group at 6 months (P = .006). In the axial and sagittal planes, there was no difference in graft position between the AL group and the OL group. The bone block was longer and there was a more extensive bone contact area in the OL group (AL, 131 mm² vs OL, 223 mm²; P < .001). At 6 months of follow-up, no significant difference in clinical scores was noted between the groups: Walch-Duplay score, 93.0 ± 10.9 points versus 91.8 ± 12.5 points (P = .867); and Rowe score, 99.0 ± 2.2 points versus 95.0 ± 8.4 points (P = .307) for the AL and OL groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

AL required more time to achieve bone block fusion than OL. This finding should be taken into account when considering this procedure for patients in a hurry to return to sports involving the shoulder.

Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

»

The proposed advantages of the arthroscopic approach in the Latarjet procedure for shoulder dislocation include improved visualization for accurate positioning of the coracoid graft, the ability to address any associated intra-articular pathologies, and the diminished potential for the formation of postoperative scar tissue and stiffness associated with an open procedure.

»

Young age, the presence of glenoid and/or humeral bone loss, a history of dislocation, a history of failed arthroscopic stabilization surgery, and an active lifestyle are all associated with recurrent dislocation and are relative indications for an osseous augmentation procedure.

»

Both the open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures result in substantial improvements in patient function, with comparable rates of recurrent instability and complication profiles.

[The causes of Latarjet surgery failure and the revision surgeries]

OBJECTIVE

To review the causes of Latarjet surgery failure and various revision surgeries, in order to provide the reference for the revision of treatment options for Latarjet surgery failure.

METHODS

Literature on the causes of Latarjet surgery failure and revision surgeries was extensively reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

Latarjet surgery is widely used in clinical practice for recurrent anterior dislocation of shoulder with glenoid defects, especially for the defects of more than 25%. The main reasons for its failure are ununion, bone resorption, graft dislocation, trauma, and graft fracture, etc. The revision surgeries are diverse, the standard treatment has not yet been formed. The revision surgeries include open iliac bone grafting, microscopic Eden-Hybinette surgery, soft tissue reconstruction, open or arthroscopic bone grafting, etc. The differences among the revisions are mainly reflected in grafts, complications, and their costs.

CONCLUSION

Latarjet surgery is difficult to operate and requires high technical requirements for the surgeons. It is necessary to continuously improve the surgical technology to reduce the complications related to Latarjet surgery and its revision surgery.

Arthroscopic Autologous Iliac Crest Bone Grafting for Reconstruction of the Glenoid: A Nonrigid Fixation Technique

Massive glenoid bone loss in recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder represents a surgical challenge. Some clinical trials have been published assessing the role of arthroscopic iliac crest bone grafting techniques for the management of recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone loss. However, bone graft fixation is still controversial. We developed a method for anatomic reconstruction of anterior glenoid bone defects using autologous iliac crest graft. This technique is based on the assumption that anatomic restoration of glenoid depth and width is essential to restore stability to the shoulder.

Arthroscopic iliac crest bone grafting in recurrent anterior shoulder instability: minimum 5-year clinical and radiologic follow-up

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical and radiologic mid- to long-term results of arthroscopic iliac crest bone-grafting for anatomic glenoid reconstruction in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Seventeen patients were evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Clinical [range of motion, subscapularis tests, apprehension sign, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Constant Score (CS), Rowe Score (RS), Walch Duplay Score (WD), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI)], and radiologic [X-ray (true a.p., Bernageau and axillary views) and computed tomography (CT)] outcome parameters were assessed.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients [mean age 31.1 (range 18-50) years] were available after a follow-up period of 78.7 (range 60-110) months. The SSV averaged 87 (range 65-100) %, CS 94 (range 83-100) points, RS 89 (range 30-100) points, WD 87 (range 25-100) points, and WOSI 70 (range 47-87) %. The apprehension sign was positive in two patients (14%). One patient required an arthroscopic capsular plication due to a persisting feeling of instability, while the second patient experienced recurrent dislocations after a trauma, but refused revision surgery. CT imaging showed a significant increase of the glenoid index from preoperative 0.8 ± 0.04 (range 0.7-0.8) to 1.0 ± 0.11 (range 0.8-1.2) at the final follow-up (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic reconstruction of anteroinferior glenoid defects using an autologous iliac crest bone-grafting technique yields satisfying clinical and radiologic results after a mid- to long-term follow-up period. Postoperative re-dislocation was experienced in one (7.1%) of the patients due to a trauma and an anatomic reconstruction of the pear-shaped glenoid configuration was observed.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Editorial Commentary: The Surgeon Is the Method: Be Thoughtful and Methodical When Adopting New Techniques

Arthroscopic and open Latarjet procedures can achieve similar results with similar complication rates and a low risk of recurrent instability, but these results may not be generalizable to every surgeon or practice. When considering a new procedure, surgeons should thoughtfully consider a stepwise approach to acquiring new skills and avoiding complications.