Cryopreserved bone allograft for the treatment of shoulder instability with glenoid defect

Effectiveness of combined surgical and exercise-based interventions following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness, risk of recurrence and return to activity (RTA) of surgery combined with exercise-based interventions (EBI) versus EBI alone after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ASD).

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Systematic literature search (MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar).

ELIGIBILITY

Studies focused on EBI or EBI as a part of postoperative care for adults with an ASD, written in English, and published after 1990. We excluded diagnostic, assessment-based studies on individuals experiencing recurrent shoulder dislocations, concomitant shoulder injury, animal or cadaveric studies. Primary outcomes were dislocation RTA. Secondary outcomes were self-reported outcome measures, strength and range of motion. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the effect of EBI (SMD; Hedges' g, RR). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Sixty studies were included (n=3598); seven were meta-analysed (n=345). The mean age of participants in the included studies was 26.71±9.19 and 56% of those included were male. Of the 60 studies included in the systematic review, 29 were fair quality (48.3%), 15 studies were good quality (25%) and 16 studies were poor quality (26.7%), (k=0.66). Individuals who underwent EBI alone were 2.03 times more likely to experience recurrent instability than individuals who underwent EBI in conjunction with surgery (RR 2.03, 95% CI 1.03 to 3.97). Individuals who underwent EBI with surgery appeared 1.81 times more likely to RTA than those who underwent EBI alone, although results were not statistically significant (RR 1.81, 95% CI 0.96 to 3.43).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery combined with EBI is more effective in reducing the risk of recurrence and possibly increasing RTA than EBI alone after traumatic ASD.

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.

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.

Massive graft resorption after iliac crest allograft reconstruction for glenoid bone loss in recurrent anterior shoulder instability

INTRODUCTION

Donor site morbidity constitutes the most prevalent source of complications during anatomic glenoid reconstruction. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction using an allogenic, tricortical iliac crest bone graft for glenoid bone loss in recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten patients [one female/nine male, mean age 31.9 years (range, 26-40)] underwent allogenic iliac crest bone grafting and were evaluated clinically [range of motion, subscapularis tests, apprehension sign, Constant score (CS), Rowe score (RS), Walch-Duplay score (WD), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV)] and radiographically [3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) scans].

RESULTS

After 23.2 months, the CS averaged 90 points (range, 84-98), RS 83 points (range, 50-100), WD 81 points (range, 50-100), WOSI 72% (range, 41-86) and the SSV 83% (range, 70-95). All patients showed a free range of motion and intact subscapularis muscle function. The apprehension sign was positive in three patients (30%) with a recurrent subluxation in one patient (10%). The glenoid surface area increased significantly from 84.4% (range, 73.5-92.1) preoperatively to 118.4% (range, 105.6-131.2) after surgery, while the glenoid defect was significantly reduced from 16.2% (range, 9.2-26.5) to 0.6% (range, 0-1.6). One year postoperative, total resorption of the allografts was observed with a glenoid surface area of 86.6% (range, 76.4-98.0) and corresponding increase of the glenoid defect to 14.0% (range, 2.9-23.6).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic glenoid reconstruction using an iliac crest bone allograft achieves satisfactory clinical results and glenohumeral stability during a short-term follow-up. However, this procedure was not observed to accomplish an anatomic reconstruction of the glenoid concavity due to excessive graft resorption.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series, therapeutic study.