Current concepts in anterior glenohumeral instability: diagnosis and treatment

Screw Fixation for the Latarjet Procedure May Reduce Risk of Recurrent Instability but Increases Reoperation Rate Compared to Suture-Button Fixation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review to compare clinical outcomes, complications, and reoperation rates of patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw vs suture-button fixation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify clinical studies directly comparing screw vs suture-button fixation for the Latarjet procedure. The search terms used were shoulder screw suture button. Patients were evaluated based on reoperation rate, complication rate, recurrent instability, radiologic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. Graft and screw position were assessed via computed tomography.

RESULTS

Seven studies (1 Level II, 6 Level III) met inclusion criteria, with 845 patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw fixation (screw group) and 279 patients with suture-button fixation (suture-button group). Mean patient age ranged from 21.2 to 29.6 years. Mean follow-up time ranged from 6.0 to 40.8 months. The recurrent instability rate ranged from 0% to 2.5% in the screw group and 0% to 8.3% in the suture-button group. The reoperation rate ranged from 0% to 7.7% in the screw group compared to 0% to 1.9% in the suture-button group. One study reported significantly lower visual analog scale pain scores in the suture-button group compared with the screw group (1.5 vs 1.2, P = .003). No other studies reported significant differences in any patient-reported outcomes. There was no significant difference in horizontal or vertical graft position, graft union rate, or complication rate between groups in any study.

CONCLUSIONS

The Latarjet procedure with screw fixation may result in a lower risk of recurrent instability compared to suture-button fixation, although screw fixation may also have a higher reoperation rate due to hardware-related complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level II to III studies.

Risk Factors Associated with First Time and Recurrent Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

Background

Shoulder instabilities constitute a large proportion of shoulder injuries and have a wide range of presentations. While evidence regarding glenohumeral dislocations and associated risk factors has been reported, less is known regarding the full spectrum of instabilities and their risk factors.

Purpose

The purpose of this systematic review was to identify modifiable risk factors to guide patient management decisions with regards to implementation of interventions to prevent or reduce the risk of shoulder instability.

Study Design

Systematic Review.

Methods

A systematic, computerized search of electronic databases (CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, SportDiscus, and Web of Science) was performed. Inclusion criteria were: (1) a diagnosis of shoulder instability (2) the statistical association of at least one risk factor was reported, (3) study designs appropriate for risk factors, (4) written in English, and (5) used an acceptable reference standard for diagnosed shoulder instability. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by at least two reviewers. All reviewers examined the quality studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). At least two reviewers independently extracted information and data regarding author, year, study population, study design, criterion standard, and strength of association statistics with risk factors.

Results

Male sex, participation in sport, hypermobility in males, and glenoid index demonstrated moderate to large risk associated with first time shoulder instability. Male sex, age \<30 years, and history of glenohumeral instability with concomitant injury demonstrated moderate to large risk associated with recurrent shoulder instability.

Conclusion

There may be an opportunity for patient education in particular populations as to their increased risk for suffering shoulder instability, particularly in young males who appear to be at increased risk for recurrent shoulder instability.

Level of Evidence

Level III.

Location and size of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion in patients with traumatic posterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

In patients with traumatic posterior shoulder instability, little is known about the precise location and size of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion.

METHODS

Forty-nine shoulders of 47 patients with traumatic posterior instability were included in this study based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) a primary or recurrent traumatic posterior shoulder dislocation and (2) the initial event being caused by trauma. Patients were excluded if they had (1) no history of trauma, (2) prior shoulder surgery, (3) no computed tomographic (CT) examination, or (4) were seizure cases. Three-dimensional images of the humerus reconstructed from CT images were reviewed using an image analysis software. The location and size of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion were measured and described on a clock face on the humeral head.

RESULTS

The reverse Hill-Sachs lesion was observed in 25 of 49 shoulders (51%). The reverse Hill-Sachs lesions were located between 1:37 and 2:48. The depth of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion (mean ± standard deviation) was 5.8 ± 2.2 mm. The extent of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion was 35° ± 12°. The average orientation of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion, represented by an angle measured from the 12 o'clock position, was 64° ± 12° and pointing toward 2:09 on a clock face. The mean length and width of reverse Hill-Sachs lesions were 9.7 ± 4.7 mm and 11.1 ± 3.6 mm, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The reverse Hill-Sachs lesion was a semicircular compression fracture located on the anteromedial aspect of the humeral head. Compared with shoulders with anterior shoulder instability, the humeral defect was smaller and located more inferiorly in shoulders with posterior instability.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with inferior glenohumeral ligament tightening using the antegrade suture passer

Arthroscopic repair is the gold standard for treating Bankart lesions, with commonly used portals including the posterior, anterosuperior, and anteroinferior portals. The two anterior portals are established through a safe triangle created by the superior margin of the subscapularis, the inferior margin of the biceps tendon, and the anterior superior edge of the glenoid cavity. However, the disadvantage of this conventional method is that it can lead to crowding of the instruments at the rotator interval, making it difficult to handle. The inferior glenohumeral ligament (IGHL) and its bands play a major role in the pathophysiology of glenohumeral instability. Restoration of the capsular tension by tightening the anterior band of the IGHL is an integral part of a successful Bankart repair, achieved by suturing the labrum at the 6 o'clock position to an anchor placed at the 5 o'clock position of the glenoid, creating a south-to-north capsulolabral shift. Traditionally, this is done using a curved suture passer (Lasso). However, taking a bite using the Lasso through the anteroinferior portal is difficult.

Effect of Glenohumeral Joint Bone Morphology on Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

Glenohumeral joint compatibility and bone morphology are among the most critical factors in shoulder stabilization. Our study investigated the effect of the bone morphological structure of the shoulder joint on anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

In our study, people with a history of shoulder dislocation were selected as the patient group. In the control group, patients with shoulder MRIs for any reason and no history of shoulder dislocation were included. Those who have a fracture around the shoulder, a congenital deformity in the shoulder region, arthrosis of the shoulder, those whose MRI images cannot be measured, those with Hill-Sachs lesion, connective tissue diseases (such as Ehler Danlos), who are unsure of their diagnosis, or who have incomplete and incorrect suspicious information in their patient file have been excluded. In our retrospective case-control study, glenoid width, glenoid height, glenoid's height-to-width ratio, glenoid's depth, glenoid's version, glenoid's inclination, humerus radius of curvature, glenoid radius of curvature, and bony shoulder stability ratio were measured on MRI images of the patients. The sample size for each group was determined using a power analysis method. The intra-class coefficient (ICC) assessed interobserver and intraobserver reliability.

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients, 40 each in the control and patient groups, were included in the study. Glenoid width was measured as 24.27 ± 1.58 in the patient group, 25.61 ± 1.72 in the control group; glenoid height was as measured 36.49 ± 2.26 in the patient group, 36.74 ± 1.99 in the control group; height-to-width ratio was measured as 1.5 ± 0.08 in the patient group, 1.43 ± 0.05 in the control group; glenoid version was as measured -0.53 ± 1.17 in the patient group, -1.44 ± 1.1 in the control group; glenoid inclination was measured as 1.44 ± 3.93 patient group, 2.64 ± 3.81 in the control group; glenoid depth was measured as 1.69 ± 0.41 in the patient group, 2.12 ± 0.53 in the control group; humerus radius of curvature was measured as 29.70 ± 6.76 in the patient group, 24.98 ± 3.22 in the control group; glenoid axial radius of curvature was measured as 61.8 ± 13.52 in the patient group, 52.53 ± 15.69 in the control group; glenoid coronal radius of curvature was measured as 43.01 ± 7.47 in the patient group, 37.74 ± 6.89 in the control group; the bony shoulder stability ratio was measured as 0.35 ± 0.06 in the patient group and 0.44 ± 0.06 in the control group. In the statistical evaluation, the glenoid width (p < 0.001), the glenoid height/width ratio (p < 0.001), the glenoid version (p < 0.001), the depth of the glenoid cavity (p < 0.001), and the radius of curvature measurements of the humeral head (p < 0.001) and the glenoid (axial, p < 0.007; coronal, p < 0.001) were found to be significantly different. Glenoid height and inclination were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The detection of bone morphological features that constitute risk factors for shoulder dislocations plays an important role in preventing shoulder dislocations. In this way, it provides essential data on personalized rehabilitation programs and treatment selection for recurrent dislocations.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with additional footprint fixation using the double-row technique at the 4 o'clock position anatomically restored the capsulolabral complex and showed good clinical results

PURPOSE

To investigate the clinical outcome and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings after arthroscopic Bankart repair with additional double anchor footprint fixation (DAFF) at the 4 o'clock position, where the native footprint is widest anatomically, for recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Forty-two patients (mean age 27.0 years) with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and without severe glenoid bone defects underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with additional DAFF at the 4 o'clock position. Using three standard portals, single-row repair was performed at the 2, 3, and 5 o'clock positions, and DAFF with the suture bridging technique was conducted at the 4 o'clock position. MRI was performed preoperatively and at 6 months postoperatively. Patients with follow-up periods of ≥1 year were included in the present study and clinically evaluated at the final follow-up. The morphology at the 2 and 4 o'clock positions on radial MRI slices was compared between the preoperative and 6-month postoperative scans, and the footprint of the repaired capsulolabral complex at 6 months postoperatively was compared between the 2 and 4 o'clock positions.

RESULTS

The average follow-up period was 19.5 ± 6.2 months. The rates of dislocation recurrence and positive apprehension test results were 2.4 and 4.8%, respectively. External rotation was restricted by 3.5°. The University of California at Los Angeles and Rowe scores at the final follow-up were 34.5 ± 1.0 points and 97.2 ± 5.7 points, respectively, representing significant improvements over the preoperative scores (p < 0.01). Although the capsulolabral complex at 6 months postoperatively was firmly repaired at both the 2 and 4 o'clock positions compared to its preoperative state, the footprint of the restored capsulolabral complex was wider at the 4 o'clock position than at the 2 o'clock position (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Additional DAFF at the 4 o'clock position improved the glenohumeral stability and function of the shoulder joint. This study suggests that this technique is a reliable and useful treatment for shoulder instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.