Magnetic resonance imaging arthrography following type II superior labrum from anterior to posterior repair: interobserver and intraobserver reliability

Open coraco-clavicular ligament reconstruction (CCLR) in treatment of displaced distal clavicle fractures has low complication rate and excellent union rate: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

It is well established that non-operative treatment of displaced distal clavicle fractures (DDCF) leads to a high non-union rate. A number of open surgical treatments in the past have shown good to excellent outcomes including shoulder function and union rate. Despite this there is no consensus on the outcome of open coraco-clavicular ligament reconstruction (CCLR). The aim of this systematic review was to assess the union rate, complications and shoulder function of open CCLR techniques in the treatment of DDCF.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A review of the online databases MEDLINE and Embase was conducted on 1 January 2021 according to PRISMA guidelines. The review was registered prospectively in the PROSPERO database. Clinical studies reporting union rate, complications and shoulder function were included. The studies were appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 18 studies eligible for inclusion with a total of 330 patients. These included 12 retrospective case series and 5 nonrandomized retrospective comparative studies and one RCT. All but one study reported on shoulder function, while all the studies reported on union rate and complications. The overall shoulder function was good to excellent using Constant-Murley score. The overall union rate was 97.6% and complication rate was 7.6%.

CONCLUSION

Open CCLR for displaced distal clavicle fractures that have a disruption of CC ligament, is a reliable treatment with excellent union rate and good to excellent shoulder functional scores.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic review.

Assessments of activities of daily living after arthroscopic SLAP repair with knot-tying versus knotless suture anchors

PURPOSE

The clinical influence of knot-tying or knotless anchor systems for the arthroscopic repair of SLAP lesions (superior labrum lesion from anterior to posterior) remain unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a retrospective cohort analysis, 61 of 78 (78.2%) patients with isolated symptomatic SLAP II lesions were examined with a minimum of 24 months after arthroscopic SLAP repair compared to a control group: 28 patients with knot-tying anchors (group I, G1; 28.95 ± 9.48 years, 23 male/5 female), 33 with knotless anchors (group II, G2; 31 ± 10.09 years, 26 male/7 female) and 140 healthy volunteers (group III, G3; 30.9 ± 8.9 years, 109 male/31 female). The clinical assessment included an examination and estimated parameters of ADL (activities of daily living), the CS (Constant score), ASES (American Shoulder and Elbow score), DASH (disability of arm-shoulder hand) and the RS (Rowe score).

RESULTS

The ROM analysis recorded no significant differences for the external rotation in 0° abduction (G1 63.75° ± 15.55° versus = vs G2 65.30° ± 18.15°; p_{ERG1 vs G2} = 0.72). The clinical outcomes revealed significantly decreased pain status in G1 for the O'brien test and in G2 for the Palm-up test, whereas Yergason test showed similar pain levels (p_O'brien = 0.03; p_{palm up} = 0.02; p_yergason > 0.5). The pulley associated rotator cuff tests revealed a significantly inferior force status in G2 compared to G1 (p_lift-off = 0.005, p_Jobe = 0.02) whereas the further rotator cuff assessments were equal. In general, the intervention group showed increased pain level and functional deficits compared to the G3. The score analysis detected no significant differences with P_{CSG1 vs G2}, P_{ASESG1 vs G2}, P_{DASHG1 vs G2} and P_{RSG1 vs G2} all > 0.05 and significant impairments compared to G3 in all scores p_{G1/G2 vs G3} < 0.05 (CS_G1 = 88.28 ± 14.42, CS_G2=92.73 ± 9.24, CS_G3 = 96.2 ± 4.96; ASES_G1 = 81.10 ± 21.69, ASES_G2 = 85.35 ± 17.12, ASES_G3 = 94.95 ± 10.39,; DASH_G1= 35.75 ± 13.44, DASH_G2 = 36.03 ± 17.55, DASH_G3 = 27.13 ± 6.52; RS_G1 = 90.71 ± 9.88, RS_G2 = 88.33 ± 11.22, RS_G3= 92.96 ± 11.27).

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical assessment revealed for both anchor systems similar outcomes but showed general underestimated impairments after the SLAP repair surgery compared to the healthy control. The clinical status only marginally differed between both techniques, wherefore the present assessment of ADL allowed no recommendation of one of these two specific surgery technique for SLAP repair.

[Magnetic resonance imaging findings after shoulder surgery: What the radiologist needs to know]

Even primary diagnostic evaluation of the shoulder is a challenge for radiologists. Many imaging findings that definitely indicate abnormal findings in the untreated shoulder should be evaluated carefully in postoperative patients. Artifacts caused by implants or metal abrasion pose considerable problems in postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Classic approaches to minimizing artifacts caused by foreign bodies include using turbo spin echo sequences, increasing bandwidth, and reducing voxel size. In recent years, several vendors have developed dedicated pulse sequences for reducing metal artifacts. Different postoperative imaging findings will be encountered, depending on the kind of surgery done. This review article describes typical postoperative MRI findings, focusing on subacromial decompression, reconstruction of the rotator cuff, labrum procedures, and biceps tenodesis.