Long-term recurrence rate in anterior shoulder instability after Bankart repair based on the on- and off-track concept

An assessment of the clinical relevance of coracoid graft osteolysis following the Latarjet procedure: a clinical and radiological review

Background

The Latarjet procedure was developed for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability in young, high-demand patients with attritional glenoid bone loss, whose risk of redislocation following primary dislocation may exceed 90%. Coracoid graft osteolysis and prominent screws are commonly observed in late computed tomography (CT) scans of patients who re-present following the procedure, but the clinical relevance of osteolysis in the overall Latarjet cohort is undetermined. We aimed to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes in patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure, and to determine if severe coracoid graft osteolysis compromised clinical outcomes.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent the open Latarjet procedure. Patients were invited via an e-questionnaire that contained a Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), and queried about redislocation and reoperation since index surgery. Preoperative glenoid bone loss was calculated on CT using the best-fit circle method. Osteolysis was graded (0, screw head buried in graft; 1, screw head exposed; 2, threads exposed; 3, complete resorption/severe osteolysis) at the level of the proximal and distal screws respectively, on axial CT scans performed ≥ 12 months postoperatively.

Results

Between 2011 and 2022, a single surgeon performed 442 Latarjet procedures. One hundred fifty eight patients responded to the questionnaire at median (interquartile range [IQR]) 44 (27-70) months postoperatively, among whom the median (IQR) WOSI score was 352 (142-666) points (0 = best, 2100 = worst). Recurrent anterior instability occurred in 3/158 (2%) patients. One patient required reoperation for this indication. Among patients who had CT scans ≥ 12 months postoperatively (median [IQR] 40 [29-69] months), 1 patient developed severe osteolysis around both screws (WOSI = 90), 17/62 (27%) patients developed severe osteolysis around 1 screw, all of which were proximal (median [IQR] WOSI = 235 [135-644]), and 44/62 (71%) patients did not develop severe osteolysis around either screw (median [IQR] WOSI = 487 [177-815]). There were no statistically significant differences in WOSI scores between groups based on the presence of severe osteolysis.

Conclusion

The Latarjet is reliable procedure that has a low rate of redislocation and reoperation. Severe coracoid graft osteolysis occurs with time, and always affects the proximal graft first. The presence of severe osteolysis did not compromise clinical outcomes.

Biomechanical Analysis Reveals Shoulder Instability With Bipolar Bone Loss Is Best Treated With Dynamic Anterior Stabilization for On-Track Lesions and With Remplissage for Off-Track Lesions

PURPOSE

To compare the biomechanical effects of augmenting Bankart repair (BR) with either remplissage or dynamic anterior stabilization (DAS) in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability with on-track or off-track bipolar bone loss.

METHODS

Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested at 60° of glenohumeral abduction in the intact, injury, and repair conditions. Injury conditions included 15% glenoid bone loss with an on-track or off-track Hill-Sachs lesion as previously recommended. Repair conditions included isolated BR, BR with remplissage, and BR with DAS (long head of biceps transfer). The glenohumeral stability was assessed by measuring the anterior translation under 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 N load and maximum load without causing instability at mid-range (60°) and end-range (90°) external rotation (ER). Maximum range of motion (ROM) was measured by applying a 2.2-N·m torque in passive ER and internal rotation.

RESULTS

Isolated BR failed to restore native glenohumeral stability in both on-track and off-track bipolar bone loss models. Both remplissage and DAS significantly decreased the anterior instability in the bipolar bone loss models, showing better restoration than the isolated BR. In the on-track lesions, DAS successfully restored native glenohumeral stability and mobility, whereas remplissage significantly decreased anterior translation without load (-2.12 ± 1.07 mm at 90° ER, P = .003; -1.98 ± 1.23 mm at 60° ER, P = .015). In the off-track lesions, remplissage restored native glenohumeral stability but led to significant ROM limitation (-8.6° ± 2.3° for internal rotation, P < .001; -13.9° ± 6.2° for ER, P = .003), whereas DAS failed to restore native stability at 90° ER regarding the increased anterior translation under 50 N (4.10 ± 1.53 mm, P < .001) and decreased maximum load (-13.8 ± 9.2 N, P = .021).

CONCLUSIONS

At time-zero, both remplissage and DAS significantly reduced residual anterior instability compared with isolated BR in the bipolar bone loss models and restored the native glenohumeral stability under most translational loads. However, remplissage could decrease the anterior translation without load for on-track lesions and may restrict ROM for off-track lesions, whereas DAS failed to restore native stability under high translational loads for off-track lesions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

DAS could be recommended to treat on-track bipolar bone loss with less biomechanical adverse effects, whereas remplissage might be the preferred procedure to address off-track bipolar bone loss for better stability.

Current Concepts on the Management of Shoulder Instability in Throwing Athletes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The management of shoulder instability in throwing athletes remains a challenge given the delicate balance between physiologic shoulder laxity facilitating performance and the inherent need for shoulder stability. This review will discuss the evaluation and management of a throwing athlete with suspected instability with a focus on recent findings and developments.

RECENT FINDINGS

The vast majority of throwing athletes with shoulder instability experience subtle microinstability as a result of repetitive microtrauma rather than episodes of gross instability. These athletes may present with arm pain, dead arms or reduced throwing velocity. Recent literature reinforces the fact that there is no "silver bullet" for the management of these athletes and an individualized, tailored approach to treatment is required. While initial nonoperative management remains the hallmark for treatment, the results of rehabilitation protocols are mixed, and some patients will ultimately undergo surgical stabilization. In these cases, it is imperative that the surgeon be judicious with the extent of surgical stabilization as overtightening of the glenohumeral joint is possible, which can adversely affect athlete performance. Managing shoulder instability in throwing athletes requires a thorough understanding of its physiologic and biomechanical underpinnings. Inconsistent results seen with surgical stabilization has led to a focus on nonoperative management for these athletes with surgery reserved for cases that fail to improve non-surgically. Overall, more high quality studies into the management of this challenging condition are warranted.

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).

Glenoid track revisited

The risk of Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) to cause instability depends not only on the HSL but also on the glenoid size. Clinically, the only method to assess the risk of instability considering the dynamic interaction of both, the HSL together with the glenoid bone loss, is the glenoid track concept. Since it was introduced in a cadaveric study, its clinical efficacy and validity have been reported in the literature. Sometimes, the medial margin of the footprint (lateral margin of the glenoid track) is difficult to identify when a HSL is overriding the footprint. In such cases, we propose a method to draw an imaginary line connecting 2 landmarks. Although 3-dimensional computed tomography is the most accurate and widely used method to assess on/off-track lesions, our interest gradually is shifting toward magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which has no radiation concern. The current magnetic resonance method is still under way. There are various risk factors influencing the recurrent instability after surgery. The glenoid track concept deals with only 1 of these factors, that is, instability caused by bony lesions. Therefore, the following 2 issues are important: 1) how to assess the glenoid track precisely and 2) how to incorporate other risk factors into consideration. The former can be achieved by obtaining the custom-made glenoid track width using not the fixed value of 83%, but more individualized value obtained by measuring the active horizontal extension angle of the opposite shoulder in the sitting position. At the same time, the gray zone (peripheral-track lesion) needs to be clearly defined. The latter can be achieved by incorporating the risk factors other than the bony lesions. One example is the Glenoid Track Instability Management Score (GTIMS), a combination of the glenoid track concept and the instability severity index score. This new scoring system is expected to increase the predictive potential of the scoring system, and accordingly to enhance clinical decision-making.

Long-term Effectiveness and Outcome-Determining Factors of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Recreational Sports Population: An Assessment of 100 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 12.7 Years

BACKGROUND

A limited number of studies have reported the long-term effectiveness of and associated factors for recurrence of anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).

PURPOSE

To report the long-term clinical outcomes after ABR in a recreational sports population and identify the associated factors that influence the final instability status.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in patients treated with ABR between 2007 and 2013 by a single surgeon. Patient data, magnetic resonance imaging measurements of bone loss and glenoid track, and intra- and perioperative factors were analyzed. After a minimum follow-up of 10 years, patient-reported outcomes including the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, the Rowe score, the visual analog scale for pain and function, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and sports activity were assessed. The current instability status was classified into 3 groups: stable, apprehensive, and redislocated. These groups were statistically compared with respect to outcomes and associated factors.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients with a mean age of 22.4 ± 5.5 years and a mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 2.1 years were included. At the final follow-up, 38 patients (38%) showed recurrent symptoms: 19 patients (19%) with subjective apprehension and 19 patients (19%) with redislocation, including 10 patients (10%) with revision surgery. At the final follow-up, the redislocated group showed the lowest patient-reported outcomes and return to sports (both P < .001). The apprehensive group also showed a lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (P = .011), Rowe score (P = .003), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = .027), and return to sports (P = .005) than the stable group. Participation in contact sports (P = .026), glenoid bone loss (P = .005), size of Hill-Sachs lesion (P = .009), and off-track lesions (P = .016) were all associated with recurrent symptoms, whereas age <20 years (P = .012), participation in contact sports (P = .003), and off-track lesions (P = .042) were associated with redislocation.

CONCLUSION

After long-term follow-up in a recreational sports population, ABR demonstrated a 19% rate of subjective apprehension and 19% rate of redislocation, with a gradual decline in clinical outcomes and sports activity over time. Therefore, candidates for ABR should be selected based on consideration of risk factors such as off-track lesions, age <20 years, and participation in contact sports.

Dynamic Anterior Stabilization with Hill-Sachs Remplissage Can be Employed in Skeletally Immature Patients-Operative Technique

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies indicate that glenoid bony augmentation raises the risk of complications during and after surgery. On the other hand, repairing the labrum alone in cases with subcritical glenoid bone loss results in recurrent instability and persistent apprehension. As a result, recent advancements in shoulder instability surgery prioritize fully restoring the anterior shoulder restraint.

OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE

A novel method for treating recurrent anterior shoulder instability with subcritical glenoid bone loss and off-track Hill-Sachs lesion in skeletally immature patients is suggested: the use of dynamic anterior stabilization technique incorporating the long head of the biceps tendon onto the anterior glenoid rim via trans-subscapular transfer, in conjunction with Hill-Sachs remplissage. A practical, step-by-step surgical technique for a complete reconstruction of the anterior capsule-labral-ligamentous complex is provided. This involves utilizing a soft-tissue dynamic anterior sling, achieved through the trans-subscapularis transfer of the long head of the biceps tendon at the glenoid level. The procedure concludes with a Hill-Sachs remplissage to further prevent off-track events and alleviate apprehension.

CONCLUSION

Dynamic anterior stabilization is a suitable approach for addressing recurring anterior shoulder instability in skeletally immature patients who have subcritical glenoid bone loss and bipolar bone lesions.

Validating the Glenoid Track Concept Using Dynamic Arthroscopic Assessment

Background

Failure after isolated Bankart repair has led surgeons to consider when to address the Hill-Sachs lesion, which is thought to be a contributor to recurrent instability. One approach utilizes the glenoid track concept to determine whether a Hill-Sachs lesion is classified as "off-track," suggesting that the addition of a remplissage procedure may aid stability. However, the accuracy and reliability of using this approach require validation using an appropriate reference.

Purpose

To determine the accuracy and reliability of using the glenoid track concept against dynamic arthroscopic assessment of Hill-Sachs lesion engagement.

Study Design

Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 49 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair surgery for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability were enrolled in this diagnostic validation study. Shoulders were classified as on-track or off-track using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) and static arthroscopic measurements. These classifications were compared with dynamic arthroscopic assessment (engagement of the Hill-Sachs lesion on the anterior glenoid rim in the 'athletic position') to determine their accuracy and reliability.

Results

The 3DCT-based measurements to determine glenoid track status had a higher positive predictive value (66% vs 42%), higher specificity (47% vs 42%), and higher accuracy (65% vs 59%) compared with static arthroscopic measurements. Static arthroscopic measurements to determine glenoid track status had a higher negative predictive value (96% vs 64%) and higher sensitivity (96% vs 81%) compared with 3DCT-based measurements. Interrater reliability (Krippendorff α) was 'fair' for determining the glenoid track status using 3DCT (0.368; 95% CI, 0.217-0.519) and 'moderate' for static arthroscopic measurements (0.523; 95% CI, 0.364-0.666). Intrarater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 3,k) was 'moderate' for 3DCT measurements (0.660; 95% CI, 0.444-0.798) and 'good' for static arthroscopic measurements (0.769; 95% CI, 0.629-0.862).

Conclusion

Determining glenoid track status using either 3DCT or static arthroscopic measurements yielded moderate accuracy and reliability. Surgeons using the glenoid track concept to aid surgical decision-making in traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability should utilize 3DCT or static arthroscopic measurements with caution.

[Imaging of posttraumatic shoulder instability : Current concepts]

Posttraumatic instability accounts for more than 95% of all shoulder instabilities with the highest incidence in patients between 20 and 30 years of age. In this age group, lesions of the capsulolabral complex are the most common sequelae after the first shoulder dislocation. Typical acute findings are the Bankart and Perthes lesions and humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL). Chronic sequelae are anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions, and nonclassifiable lesions with deficient anterioinferior labrum and glenohumeral ligaments. Recently, quantification of Hill-Sachs and bony Bankart lesions with glenoid defects have become the focus of interest: bipolar bone loss has emerged to be one important factor of recurrent instability that has not been addressed during the first stabilizing operation. The glenoid track concept emphasizes the importance of bipolar bone loss, where the glenoid track refers to the contact area between the humeral head and the glenoid at the end-range of motion in abduction, extension and external rotation. Any lesion of the humeral head that extends beyond the glenoid track is considered high risk for engagement of the humeral head at the glenoid margin with subsequent dislocation. Both the Hill-Sachs interval and the glenoid track can be determined using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging and, thus, help to define the status of the shoulder (on-track vs. off-track), which is prerequisite for planning the appropriate operative procedure. Similar tendencies also exist for posttraumatic posterior instabilities which are much rarer.

Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Patients With Hyperlaxity and Near-Track Lesions

Background

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair presents a challenging clinical problem, with the primary stabilization procedure often portending the best chance for clinical success.

Purpose

To determine if capsuloligamentous laxity affects failure (recurrent dislocation, subluxation, and/or perceived instability symptoms) after arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with near-track lesions (ie, those with smaller distance to dislocation [DTD]).

Study Design

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

The authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability at a single institution between 2007 and 2019 and who had at least 2 years of follow-up data. Patients with glenoid bone loss >20%, off-track lesions, concomitant remplissage, or rotator cuff tear were excluded. Capsuloligamentous laxity, or hyperlaxity, was defined as external rotation >85° with the arm at the side and/or grade ≥2 in at least 2 planes with the shoulder at 90° of abduction. Near-track lesions were defined as those with a DTD <10 mm.

Results

Included were 173 patients (mean age, 20.5 years; mean DTD, 16.2 mm), of whom 16.8% sustained a recurrent dislocation and 6.4% had recurrent subluxations (defined as any subjective complaint of recurrent instability without frank dislocation), for an overall recurrent instability rate of 23.1%. The rate of revision stabilization was 15.6%. The mean time to follow-up was 7.4 years. Independent predictors of recurrent instability were younger age (P = .001), smaller DTD (P = .021), >1 preoperative instability episode (P < .001), and the presence of hyperlaxity during examination under anesthesia (P = .013). Among patients with near-track lesions, those with hyperlaxity had a recurrent instability rate almost double that of patients without hyperlaxity (odds ratio, 34.1; P = .04). The increased rate of failure and recurrent dislocation in the near-track hyperlaxity cohort remained elevated, even in patients with no bone loss.

Conclusion

Capsuloligamentous shoulder laxity was a significant independent risk factor for failure after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair without remplissage and was more predictive of failure in patients with versus without near-track lesions.

Use of 3D-Printed Patient-Specific Guide for Latarjet Procedure in Patients With Anterior Shoulder Instability: Technical Note

Anterior shoulder instability can lead to anterior glenoid bone loss associated with humeral posterior deformity (bipolar bone loss). Latarjet procedure is a commonly used surgical option in such cases. However, the procedure is associated with complications in up 15% of the cases often associated with inadequate positioning of coracoid bone graft and screws. Considering that acknowledgment of patient anatomy and use of surgical planning intraoperatively can reduce such complications, we describe the use of 3D printing tools to obtain a 3D Patient-Specific Surgical Guide to aid in the Latarjet procedure. Such tools present advantages and limitations compared to other tools available, which are also discussed in this article.

Pediatric and Adolescent Shoulder Instability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Traumatic and atraumatic shoulder instability is common in pediatric and adolescent patients. It is well-established that young patients with anterior shoulder dislocation are at high risk of recurrent instability. This review assesses the current literature pertaining to management of both anterior instability and MDI in the pediatric and adolescent populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current research suggests that pediatric and adolescent patients with shoulder instability have excellent outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair; however, higher rates of recurrent instability requiring revision surgical management have been identified in patients with more than one dislocation episode pre-operatively, those with Hill-Sachs lesions and those under age 16. The addition of the remplissage procedure to an arthroscopic Bankart repair may be useful in preventing recurrent instability for patients with large Hill-Sachs lesions. Open procedures with bony glenoid augmentation may be indicated in patients with significant glenoid bone loss, or those who have failed primary surgical management, with promising outcomes reported following the Latarjet coracoid process transfer procedure in the adolescent population. Pediatric and adolescent patients with hyperlaxity, and those participating in swimming or gymnastics are more likely to have multidirectional instability (MDI). Non-surgical management with physical therapy is the mainstay of treatment for MDI with positive outcomes reported overall. In young patients with MDI who continue to have symptoms of instability and pain that effects daily activities or sports despite an adequate and appropriate course of rehabilitation, surgical management with capsulorrhaphy may be considered, with promising outcomes reported for both open and arthroscopic techniques. Attentive selection of timing and surgical procedure for pediatric and adolescent patients with anterior shoulder instability may help to prevent recurrent instability following shoulder stabilization. Although most pediatric and adolescent patients with MDI do well following non-surgical management alone, those that fail conservative management have good outcomes following arthroscopic or open capsulorrhaphy.

Latarjet procedure for failed Bankart repair provides better stability and return to sports, but worse postoperative pain and external rotation limitations with more complications, compared to revision Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the clinical results of revision Bankart repair versus the Latarjet procedure for failed Bankart repair.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in databases, such as Pubmed, Embase, and Scopus Library. The studies were appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies tool. Studies for failed Bankart repair with revision Bankart repair or Latarjet procedure were included. The pain VAS, ROWE score, rate of return to sports and preinjury level of sports, recurrent instability, range of motion, and complications were compared. Additionally, the pain VAS, ROWE score, forward flexion, and external rotation at side were subjected to a meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included in the systematic review. The functional outcomes in terms of the ROWE score, recurrent instability, return to sports, and the preinjury level of sports was better in the Latarjet procedure group than those in the revision Bankart repair group (ROWE score, 91 vs. 86.7; recurrent instability rate, 3.5% vs. 14.4%; return to sports rate, 100% vs. 87.9%; return to preinjury level of sports rate, 89.9% vs. 74.9%; all P < 0.001). However, the results of postoperative pain and the postoperative limitation of external rotation at side were worse in the Latarjet procedure group than those in the revision Bankart repair group (pain VAS, 1.4 vs. 0.8; postoperative external rotation at side, 38° vs. 60°; all P < 0.001). In addition, the majority of the complications occurred in the Latarjet procedure group. In the meta-analysis, the postoperative ROWE score was significantly higher in the Latarjet procedure group than that in the revision Bankart group (revision Bankart repair: 95% CI 88.9-80.9, I² = 65.70; Latarjet procedure: 95% CI 95.8-88.1, I² = 93.37; P = 0.014). However, the pain VAS, forward flexion, and external rotation at side did not reach the significant level in the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Compared with revision Bankart repair, the Latarjet procedure for failed Bankart repair showed better ROWE scores, stability, and return to sports or preinjury level of sports; however, the postoperative pain and the limitation of external rotation at side were worse with more complications.

IRB NO

KUMC 2022-01-024.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.