Search

Introduction: Incorrect positioning is one of the main factors for glenoid component loosening in reverse shoulder arthroplasty and component placement can be challenging. This study aimed to assess whether Patient-Specific Instrumentation (PSI) provides better guide pin positioning accuracy and is superior to standard guided and freehand instrumentation methods in cases of glenoid bone deformity., Materials and Methods: Based on the Walch classification, five different scapula types were acquired by computed tomography (CT). For each type, two different surgeons placed a guide pin into the scapula using three different methods: freehand method, conventional non-patient-specific guide, and PSI guide. Each method was repeated five times by both surgeons. In these experiments, a total of 150 samples of scapula models were used (5 × 2 × 3 × 5 = 150). Post-operative CT scans of the samples with the guide pin were digitally assessed and the accuracy of the pin placement was determined by comparison to the preoperative planning on a three-dimensional (3D) model., Results: The PSI method showed accuracies to the preoperative plan of 2.68 (SD 2.10) degrees for version angle ( p < .05), 2.59 (SD 2.68) degrees for inclination angle ( p < .05), and 1.55 (SD 1.26) mm for entry point offset ( p < .05). The mean and standard deviation errors compared to planned values of version angle, inclination angle, and entry point offset were statistically significant for the PSI method for the type C defected glenoid and non-arthritic glenoid., Conclusion: Using the PSI guide created by an image processing software tool for guide pin positioning showed advantages in glenoid component positioning over other methods, for defected and intact glenoid types, but correlation with clinical outcomes should be examined.

Purpose: The ideal treatment algorithm is still controversial for Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior (SLAP) tears. In this systematic review, we aimed to clarify and ascertain which treatment modality is effective and more usable in which conditions., Methods: In this systematic review, we used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines established for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. "SLAP or Superior Labral Anterior-Posterior" and "biceps tenodesis" search terms were used in The Cochrane Library database and Pubmed from their inception to the 30th of September 2020. A total of 2326 titles were screened and 2069 articles were removed because of their ineligibility. Full texts of 14 studies were screened and finally, six were suitable for the present systematic review. Demographic details and study characteristics, patient satisfaction, functional outcomes, return to preinjury sports level, reoperation, stiffness, sling time and rehabilitation protocols were reviewed and compared between SLAP repair and biceps tenodesis groups., Results: A total of 2326 titles were screened and six studies were detected eligible. Results of 287 patients (SLAP repair: 160, Biceps Tenodesis: 127) were reviewed in included six studies. Biceps tenodesis was showed as more satisfied technique in four of the studies but the statistical comparing results of two groups were not significantly different in each study. Different functional scoring systems used in the studies were not statistically significantly different between the groups. The percentage of return to sport and preinjury level is higher in biceps tenodesis in the five studies. The total reoperation rate for SLAP repair was 19/160 (12%) and biceps tenodesis was 7/127 (6%)., Conclusion: The biceps tenodesis has a higher return to preinjury sports level, higher patient satisfaction and lower reoperation rates but functional scores are similar between SLAP repair groups in patients with SLAP tear.

Background: Tear completion followed by repair (TCR) and in situ repair (ISR) have been widely used for bursal-side partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PTRCTs). Both techniques have shown favorable results; however, controversy continues in terms of the best management., Purpose: To compare the histological and biomechanical outcomes of these 2 techniques for 50% partial-thickness bursal-side rotator cuff tear repair in a rabbit model., Study Design: Controlled laboratory study., Methods: A total of 27 rabbits were used in this experimental study. Seven rabbits were sacrificed at the beginning of the study to form an intact tendon control group. A chronic 50% partial-thickness bursal-side tear model was created in 20 rabbits, and 5 rabbits were sacrificed for biomechanical testing of chronic partial-thickness tears (control group) without repair. In 15 rabbits, partial-thickness tears were repaired after 8 weeks. Partial-thickness tears in the right shoulders were completed to full thickness and repaired; in contrast, left shoulders were repaired in situ. All rabbits were euthanized 8 weeks after the repair. The tendons were tested biomechanically for ultimate failure, linear stiffness, and displacement. Histological evaluations of tendon-to-bone healing were performed via the modified Watkins score., Results: Macroscopically, all repaired tendons were attached to the greater tuberosity. The TCR group had a higher failure load than the ISR group, with mean values of 140.4 ± 13.8 N and 108.1 ± 16.6 N, respectively ( P = .001). The modified Watkins score was significantly higher in the TCR group (23.5; range, 22-27) than in the ISR group (19.5; range, 16-22) ( P = .009)., Conclusion: Both repair techniques are effective for 50% partial-thickness bursal-side rotator cuff tears; however, TCR yields significantly superior biomechanical and histological characteristics compared with ISR., Clinical Relevance: Tear completion and repair technique may increase tendon-to-bone healing and thereby reduce re-rupture rate in the partial thickness bursal side rotator cuff tears.