Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes After Arthroscopic Inlay Bristow Surgery With Screw Versus Suture Button Fixation: A Comparative Study of 117 Patients With 3.3-Year Follow-up

Association of the Inlay Structure Used in the Modified Bristow Procedure With Accelerated Bone Union: Comparing the Cuistow and Modified Bristow Procedures

Background

The Chinese unique inlay Bristow (Cuistow) procedure is a modified Bristow surgery in which an inlay (mortise-and-tenon) structure is added to the contact surface between the coracoid tip and the glenoid. Patients who have undergone the Cuistow procedure have had satisfying clinical performance and excellent postoperative bone healing rates (96.1%).

Purpose

To compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes after the arthroscopic Cuistow procedure and the arthroscopic Bristow procedure.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A total of 91 patients who underwent either the Cuistow or Bristow procedure between January 2017 and March 2018 were selected, and 69 patients (70 shoulders; 35 in the Cuistow group and 35 in the Bristow group) were included. Clinical assessment at minimum 24 months postoperatively, including the visual analog scale for pain and instability, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Rowe score, subjective shoulder value score, and active range of motion, was completed by independent observers and compared with values collected preoperatively. Assessment with 3-dimensional computed tomography scans was performed preoperatively; immediately after the operation; at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively; and at the final follow-up.

Results

A total of 69 patients (70 shoulders) were included, with a mean follow-up duration of 34.41 ± 5.99 months (range, 24-50 months). Both groups saw significant improvement in visual analog scale for pain and instability, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Rowe, and subjective shoulder value scores at the final follow-up compared with the preoperative values (P < .001 for all), with no significant between-group differences on any clinical outcomes at the final follow-up. The 3-month postoperative graft union rate on computed tomography was significantly higher in the Cuistow group compared with the Bristow group (82.9% vs 51.4%, respectively, P = .003), although the graft union rate at the final follow-up was not significantly different (94.3% vs 85.7%, respectively; P = .449).

Conclusion

Patients receiving the Cuistow procedure had equivalent clinical outcomes and a significantly higher bone union rate at 3 months postoperatively than those in the Bristow group. The inlay structure used in the Cuistow procedure was found to be associated with accelerated bone union.

The Arthroscopically Guided Bristow-Latarjet Procedure With Cortical Button Fixation: A Minimum 10-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Despite improved visualization, the use of arthroscopic surgery to perform the Latarjet procedure has not decreased the rates of complications and glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) in the long term. Many of the reported complications are related to the use of screws for bone block fixation with freehand drilling.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the long-term (at a minimum 10-year follow-up) clinical and radiological outcomes of the arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet procedure using a posterior guided drilling technique and suture button for coracoid bone graft fixation.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent the arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet procedure with suture button fixation between 2011 and 2013 were reviewed by 2 independent evaluators. Complications and revision surgery were recorded, and we evaluated patient-reported outcomes including subjective scores, recurrence of shoulder instability (dislocation or subluxation), range of motion limitations, and return to sports. Patients had radiographs taken at least 10 years after surgery to assess glenohumeral OA according to the Samilson-Prieto classification system and computed tomography scans to assess bone block positioning and healing.

RESULTS

A total of 65 consecutive patients (68 shoulders) with a mean follow-up of 135 months (range, 120-156 months) were included. The mean age at the time of surgery was 25 ± 8 years; 7 patients had previous failed Bankart repair. At follow-up, 94% (64/68) of the shoulders had no recurrence of instability. The 4 cases of instability recurrence were traumatic and occurred at 3 weeks (a fall), 4 months, 2 years, and 7 years after surgery. No hardware failures, coracoid fractures, or neurological complications were observed. Overall, 61 patients (94%) were still participating in sports, with 44 (68%) at the same or higher level. Range of motion showed nonsignificant restrictions in external rotation with the arm at the side (7° ± 9°) and with the arm at 90° of abduction (9° ± 10°) compared with the contralateral side. Additionally, 11 shoulders (16%) had some residual anterior apprehension on clinical examination. At last follow-up, 77% (47/61) of the shoulders had no OA development or progression. Previous failed Bankart repair was a risk factor for the development of OA. Patients with OA had significantly lower Subjective Shoulder Value scores (79% vs 91%, respectively; P = .01) and decreased external rotation with the arm at the side (40° vs 65°, respectively; P = .001) compared with patients with no or little OA.

CONCLUSION

The arthroscopically guided Bristow-Latarjet procedure with suture button fixation is a safe and durable surgical treatment method for recurrent anterior shoulder instability, allowing a high rate of return to sports without significant motion restrictions and no or little OA in the long term.

Editorial Commentary: Suture-Button Fixation May Have Advantages Over Screw Fixation for Glenoid Bone Grafting Procedures for Shoulder Instability

Orthopaedic suture buttons have been increasingly used in a variety of procedures, such as syndesmosis stabilization, coracoclavicular ligament repair, anterior cruciate ligament graft fixation, and Lisfranc injury treatment. In many instances, suture-button fixation constructs have shown equivalent, if not superior, outcomes to screw fixation. More recently, suture buttons have been suggested for osseous fixation of the coracoid during the Latarjet procedure, as well as other anterior (or posterior) bone block reconstruction of the glenoid using distal tibial allograft, tricortical iliac crest, or distal clavicle in cases of complex shoulder instability. Suture buttons offer several unique advantages, including the ability to tension and retension graft fixation, smaller driller paths with bone preservation, less osteolysis, lower risk of hardware removal, and greater ease of hardware revision and/or secondary surgery. However, certain disadvantages also exist, such as higher implant costs, less time-zero implant rigidity, technical difficulty, and, potentially, less mediolateral stability of the bone graft. Time will tell if these suture-button constructs will supplant traditional screw fixation for the Latarjet procedure in terms of clinical and cost-effectiveness.

Sutures, Screws, Buttons, and Anchors: A Review of Current Bone Graft Fixation Devices for Glenoid Bone Loss in the Unstable Shoulder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anterior shoulder instability is associated with concomitant injury to several stabilizing structures of the shoulder, including glenoid bone loss. While instability is most common in young athletes and patients with predisposing conditions of hyperlaxity, recurrent shoulder instability can occur throughout various age ranges and may lead to longer term effects including pain and shoulder arthritis. Glenoid bone loss exceeding certain thresholds is generally treated by glenoid reconstruction via bone block augmentation to adequately stabilize the glenohumeral joint. These procedures increase the width of the articular surface on which the humeral head can translate before dislocation and, based on the procedure performed, provide a sling effect via the conjoined tendon, and increase tension to support the anterior capsule. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available literature regarding bone block fixation techniques.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Various fixation techniques have been utilized to secure bone block transfers. Though screw fixation has traditionally been used for bone block fixation, suture buttons, suture anchors, and all-suture techniques have been utilized in attempts to avoid complications associated with the use of screws. Biomechanical studies report variable force-resistance, displacement, and mode of failure when comparing screw to suture button-based fixation of glenoid bone blocks. Clinical and radiographic studies have shown these novel suture-based techniques to be comparable, and in some cases advantageous, to traditional screw fixation techniques. While screw fixation has long been the standard of care in glenoid bone block procedures, it is associated with high complication rates, leading surgeons to endeavor toward new fixation techniques. In available biomechanical studies, screw fixation has consistently demonstrated high maximal load-to-failure and displacement with cyclic loading. Studies have reported similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in both screw and suture-based fixation methods, with evidence of reduced bone resorption with suture fixation. While suture button fixation is associated with a higher rate of recurrent instability, overall complication rates are low. Future research should address biomechanical shortcomings of suture-based fixation techniques and continue to assess long-term follow-up of patients treated with each fixation method.

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.

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).

Editorial Commentary: Suture Button Fixation for the Latarjet Procedure Is Superior to Screw Fixation

An increasing body of evidence suggests that suture button fixation is comparable with screw fixation in Latarjet and potentially associated with reduced graft resorption. Suture button fixation may facilitate performing the Latarjet procedure, particularly when done in an arthroscopic manner. The use of suture button fixation technique theoretically facilitates improved positioning of the graft on the glenoid, as it frees the surgeon from the potential of the soft-tissue envelope to impact positioning of the graft, which can occur with screw-based guides. The bone graft can be shuttled into an optimal position and then tensioned with relative ease in comparison with screw-based techniques. Suture button fixation results in lower complication rates compared with screw fixation; almost one third of the screw fixation complications are hardware-related, and screw fixation results in a high rate of hardware removal. Moreover, the arthroscopic Latarjet suture button literature is published by experienced surgeons. Arthroscopic Latarjet has a significant learning curve, reducing the translatability of studies that report superior findings with any one technique. The generalizability of results reminds us that evidence-based medicine should be practiced through the lens of not only patient preferences, but also through an honest appraisal of a surgeon's own ability.

Inlay structure can improve bone graft stability in the Bristow procedure

BACKGROUND

Compared with the Latarjet procedure, the Bristow procedure has a lower screw-related complication rate but poor bone healing. A modified Inlay Bristow procedure has been reported to significantly improve the bone healing rate, but the biomechanical mechanism is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability of the bone graft between a modified Inlay Bristow procedure and the classic Bristow procedure.

METHODS

Sixteen left scapula models (Sawbones, Composite Scapula, and fourth generation) were randomly divided into 2 groups (8:8). The bone graft in the first group was fixed with a 3.5 mm screw using the Inlay structure. The bone graft in the second group was fixed with a 3.5 mm screw via the traditional method. The maximum cyclic displacement, ultimate failure load and stiffness were evaluated biomechanically. The failure type was recorded for each model.

RESULTS

Cyclic loading tests demonstrated that the maximum cyclic displacement of the Inlay procedure was significantly smaller (P = .001) than that of the classic procedure. The Inlay Bristow technique resulted in a significantly higher (P = .024) ultimate failure load than the classic Bristow technique. The stiffness of the classic group was 19.17 ± 4.01 N/mm and that of the inlay group was 22.34 ± 5.35 N/mm (P = .232). Failure was mainly due to bone graft fractures through the drill hole or glenoid bone fractures.

CONCLUSION

Inlay Bristow fixation of the bone graft in a Sawbones model provides significantly stronger fixation and better time point zero stability than classic Bristow fixation, suggesting a higher likelihood of graft union.

All-Arthroscopic Glenoid Bone Augmentation Using Iliac Crest Autograft Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: Button Fixation Is a Feasible and Satisfactory Alternative to Screw Fixation

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy of all-arthroscopic glenoid bone augmentation surgery using the iliac crest autograft procedure. Furthermore, we sought to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of using screw versus button fixation, in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2019, 134 shoulders with persistent instability were surgically treated with an arthroscopically placed autologous iliac crest bone graft transfer procedure. Preoperative and postoperative clinical follow-up data were evaluated using the range of motion, and the Walch-Duplay, American Shoulder and Elbow Society, and Rowe scores. Radiologic assessment on 3-dimensional computed tomography scans was performed preoperatively, immediately after surgery, as well as postoperatively, at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and at the final follow-up stage. Graft positions, healing, and resorption were evaluated from postoperative images.

RESULTS

This study included 102 patients who underwent arthroscopic iliac crest bone grafting procedure with 2 screws fixation (n = 37; group 1) and 2 button fixation (n = 65; group 2). The mean follow-up period was 37 months. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of clinical scores, shoulder motion range, graft healing, or graft positions on computed tomography scans (P>.05). In group 1, 1 patient showed mechanical irritation and persistent pain around the screw insertion site, being treated through the arthroscopic removal of the screws. The average postoperative bony resorption percentages were 20.3% and 11.2% at 6 months, and 32.4% and 19.3% at 12 months, in group 1 and group 2, respectively. A statistically significant difference was detected between the two groups (P<.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In the arthroscopic iliac crest bone grafting procedure for the treatment of chronic osseous anterior shoulder instability, excellent functional results were obtained after both button fixation and screw fixation techniques. In addition, less graft resorption and no hardware-related complications were detected with suture button fixation technique.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Clinical Outcomes, Union Rates, and Complications of Screw Versus Button Fixation in the Bristow-Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The Latarjet procedure is a common procedure for treating critical glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability. Implants such as the screw and cortical button are widely used. The aim of this study was to compare studies on screw versus button fixation techniques in the Bristow-Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability in terms of clinical outcomes, union rates, and complications.

Methods

The PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were searched to find comparative studies that reported outcomes of using screw versus button fixation in the Bristow-Latarjet procedure following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies that directly compared the screw and button fixation techniques and provided postoperative patient-reported outcomes, union rates, or complications were included. The Methodology Index for Non-Randomized Research (MINORS) criteria were used to assess the quality of the included studies. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes whereas mean differences were calculated for continuous outcomes.

Results

Five articles included a total of 877 shoulders. All five studies had level 3 evidence. There was no statistically significant difference between the two techniques using the Walch-Duplay score, visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, range of motion, and graft union rates. However, the button fixation technique had statistically significantly higher recurrence rates than the screw fixation technique (OR, 0.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.58; p = 0.001).

Conclusions

The screw fixation technique had statistically significantly lower recurrence rates than the button fixation technique. However, there was no significant difference between screw and button fixation techniques regarding postoperative patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, graft union rates, nerve injury rates, infection rates, and reoperation rates.

The Arthroscopic Bristow Procedure Is Superior to the Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure in Return to Sports but Inferior in Graft Healing: A Comparative Study With 3.4-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare clinical and computed tomography outcomes between the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and the arthroscopic Bristow procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Latarjet or Bristow procedures with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-eight shoulders were included in the Latarjet group, and 34 were included in the Bristow group. Recurrence of dislocation, clinical scores, rate of return to sports (RTS), and computed tomography assessment findings (position of transferred coracoid, graft healing, graft absorption, and glenohumeral degenerative osteoarthritis [OA]) were obtained at final follow-up.

RESULTS

No recurrent dislocation occurred in either group, and no significant differences in clinical scores were found between the 2 procedures, with a mean follow-up period of 3.4 years. The operative time in the Bristow group was significantly shorter than that in the Latarjet group (P < .001). The transferred coracoid had healed in 94.7% of the patients in the Latarjet group and 85.3% in the Bristow group at final follow-up (P = .01). No significant difference in graft absorption or the degree of glenohumeral OA was detected between the 2 groups. However, moderate to severe OA only occurred in the Latarjet group at final follow-up (4 of 38 shoulders, 10.5%). The postoperative external rotation angle and level of RTS favored the Latarjet procedure (P = .030 and P = .034, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic Bristow procedures led to good clinical scores with no new dislocation episodes. The Bristow group showed significantly less graft healing than the Latarjet group. However, the arthroscopic Bristow procedure took less operative time and showed a lower rate of early moderate to severe glenohumeral OA, better range of motion, and a higher rate of RTS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Previously failed Bankart repair and the duration from first dislocation to surgery were the risk factors associated with the level of return to sports after coracoid transfer

PURPOSE

This study aims to determine the rate of different levels of return to sports (RTS) in athletes undergoing the modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure and the factors associated with the level of RTS.

METHODS

The study was performed retrospectively on patients with traumatic anterior shoulder instability who underwent the modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The RTS rate, the level of return and the timing of return were assessed. Additionally, factors such as preoperative basic information, clinical outcomes, graft position, graft healing and graft absorption were analysed to investigate their correlation with the level of RTS. Multivariate regression models were used to evaluate the factors affecting the level of RTS.

RESULTS

In total, this study included 182 shoulders of 177 athletes undergoing the modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure. Of these patients, 142 (78.0%) shoulders of 137 athletes were enrolled, with a mean of 3.3-year follow-up. At the final follow-up, 134 (94.4%) shoulders were able to RTS, 123 (86.6%) shoulders were able to RTS to the pre-injury level, 52 (36.6%) shoulders could be completely "forgotten" without any psychological barrier during exercise. The multivariate logistic regression analysis identified the variable associated with RTS at the pre-injury level as previously failed arthroscopic Bankart repair (p < 0.001). As for the "forgetting" operated shoulder, the duration from first dislocation to surgery was a significant independent predictor (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Although a large majority of athletes were able to RTS at the pre-injury level after the modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure, about two-thirds of the athletes felt difference in shoulders on both sides and could not completely "forget" the operated shoulder during exercise. Previously failed Bankart repair and the duration from first dislocation to surgery were the risk factors associated with the level of RTS after the modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Radiological and Histological Analyses of Nonrigid Versus Rigid Fixation for Free Bone Block Procedures in a Rabbit Model of Glenoid Defects

BACKGROUND

Nonrigid fixation techniques have been recently introduced in free bone block (FBB) procedures to treat substantial glenoid bone loss in patients with anterior shoulder instability. However, the radiological and histological effectiveness of nonrigid fixation versus conventional rigid fixation have not been comprehensively understood in vivo.

PURPOSE

To (1) explore the radiological and histological characteristics of nonrigid fixation for FBB procedures in a rabbit model of glenoid defects and (2) further compare them with those of conventional rigid fixation.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Unilateral shoulder glenoid defects were created in 36 mature New Zealand White rabbits, of which 24 underwent FBB procedures using allogenic iliac crest bone and were randomly divided into rigid fixation (RF) and nonrigid fixation (N-RF) groups, with the remaining divided into 2 control groups: 6 with sham surgery for glenoid defects (GD group) and 6 native glenoids (normal group). In the RF and N-RF groups, 6 rabbits were sacrificed at 6 or 12 weeks postoperatively for radiological and histological analyses of the reconstructed glenoid, and all rabbits in the GD and normal groups were sacrificed at 12 weeks. The radiological glenoid morphology was evaluated via micro-computed tomography. Moreover, the graft-glenoid healing and graft remodeling processes were determined using histological staining.

RESULTS

At 6 weeks, both the N-RF and RF groups had similarly improved radiological axial radian and en face area of the glenoid compared with the GD group, but the N-RF group showed superiority in restoration of the glenoid radian and area compared with the RF group at 12 weeks, with the native glenoid as the baseline. Histologically, the bone graft in both groups was substantively integrated into the deficient glenoid neck at 6 and 12 weeks, showing similar osseous healing processes at the graft-glenoid junction. Moreover, the bone graft histologically presented similar regenerated vascular density, total graft bone, and integrated graft bone in both groups. In contrast, the N-RF group had a different remodeling profile on radiological and histological analyses regarding regional bone resorption, mineralization, and fibrous tissue replacement during osseointegration.

CONCLUSION

Compared with rigid fixation, nonrigid fixation resulted in superior reconstructed glenoid morphology radiologically and similar graft-glenoid osseous healing histologically, showing different graft remodeling profiles of regional bone resorption, mineralization, and fibrous tissue replacement.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The nonrigid fixation technique can be feasible for FBB procedures to treat glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability. More clinical evidence is required to determine its pros and cons compared with conventional rigid fixation.