Search

INTRODUCTION Anterior glenohumeral bone loss reconstruction reduces failure rates after soft tissue surgery in patients with large glenoid bone defects. Multiple bone block techniques have been described, most with metal hardware fixation. The objective of this study is to evaluate the safety, as well as the short-term functional and radiological results of an arthroscopic bone block metal-free fixation or bone block cerclage. MATERIAL AND METHODS Retrospective study of patients with glenohumeral instability and>15% glenoid bone loss operated during 2019 with follow-up of at least 12 months. Radiography and computerized tomography studies were performed. Functional outcomes were evaluated before and after surgery with the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index and Rowe score. RESULTS A total of 21 patients with a median age of 30.6 (SD 7.1) were included. All showed radiographic consolidation at 3 months follow-up. A percentage of 90.4 of bone grafts presented osteolysis at peripherical areas and 95.2% revealed consolidation in the areas with contact to the glenoid. The median glenoid estimated surface went from 79.3% before surgery to 98.4% at 12 months. Functional scores were statically significant (P

The purpose of this study was to compare the preoperative magnetic resonance arthrography findings in patients who underwent glenohumeral stabilization with a history of primary instability, recurrent instability, or failed stabilization.All patients who presented with glenohumeral instability and underwent stabilization performed by a single surgeon in our institution between 2008 and 2020 were considered for inclusion in this study. The magnetic resonance arthrography findings of all patients were recorded. Imaging findings were compared between patients with primary instability, those with recurrent instability, and those with failed prior stabilization. P.05 was considered statistically significant.Overall, 871 patients were included, of whom 814 (93.5%) were male patients; the mean age was 23.1 years (range, 13-57 years). There were 200 patients with primary instability, 571 with recurrent instability, and 100 who required revision stabilization surgery, with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. A significantly higher amount of glenoid bone loss was noted in patients with recurrent instability (43.4%) and failed prior stabilization (56%) than in those with primary instability (26.5%) (P.0001). Additionally, a significantly higher number of Hill-Sachs lesions were observed in patients with recurrent instability (70.1%) and failed prior stabilization (89%) than in those with primary instability (67.5%) (P.0001). We found no significant differences between the groups regarding articular cartilage damage, glenolabral articular disruption, anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments, or superior labral anterior-posterior tears (P.05).Patients presenting for stabilization with recurrent instability or following a failed stabilization procedure have higher rates of glenohumeral bone loss than those with primary instability. Therefore, stabilization of primary instability, particularly in high-functioning athletes with a view to preventing recurrence, may reduce the overall progression of glenohumeral bone loss and potential subsequent inferior clinical outcomes.

Bristow-Latarjet procedure has been widely regarded as a reliable and satisfactory operation for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability, especially for patients with significant glenoid bone loss or high sports demand. Once failed, however, the subsequent revision surgery could be challenging. Eden-Hybinette procedure is the most common operation for revision of failed Bristow-Latarjet. It can perfectly restore the bone defect of the failed Bristow-Latarjet by harvesting a proper size of iliac bone block. Furthermore, several studies have shown the advantages of using suture button fixation in the revision surgery for failed Bristow-Latarjet procedure. However, the potential inferior biomechanical strength of suture button fixation is still a concern. This Technical Note introduced an arthroscopic “double-inlay” Eden-Hybinette procedure with modified suture button fixation for the revision of failed Bristow-Latarjet. With its “quadruple” reinforcement effect, this procedure can achieve an excellent biomechanical strength of fixation., Technique Video Video 1 In this technical note, we will introduce an arthroscopic “double-inlay” Eden-Hybinette procedure with modified suture button fixation. This is a failed Latarjet procedure with suture button fixation case, male, 34 years old, right shoulder. From the preoperation CT image, we can see the transferred coracoid facture, and the red parts show the metal implants of previous operation. The iliac bone graft is harvested and prepared as we mentioned in this technical note. The debridement and releasing procedure should be performed very carefully. The residual conjoint tendon and also nerves and vessels are identified and protected. The anterior surface of the glenoid is refreshed. All residual suture threads and implants should be removed. And the fractured coracoid is also identified and refreshed. A specially designed positioner is used to drill a hole about 4:30 o’clock on the anterior glenoid and about 7 mm to the glenoid surface with a 2.5-mm K-wire. The second hole is drilled 13 mm above the first hole using the positioner with 13-mm offset. Centered on these two holes, two bone grooves with a diameter of 10-mm and 4-mm depth, respectively, are made using a special drill bit. The distance between these two grooves will be 3 mm. The two Mini-TightRopes loaded on the iliac bone graft are pulled through the glenoid by the Orthocord threads. So that the prepared iliac bone graft is pulled onto the anterior glenoid through the previous split on the subscapularis. After confirmation of the fitting of the iliac bone graft, the two TigerWire thread loops were pulled posteriorly as much as possible to keep the iliac bone graft tightly onto the glenoid. Meanwhile, the two Mini-TightRopes are tightened anteriorly. Then the TigerWire thread loops are pulled anteriorly and reopened. At least 5 tight knots for each TigerWire thread are tied to fix the iliac bone graft. Finally, each Mini-TightRope is fixed with at least 5 knots to give a double fixation. Two sockets are drilled onto the surface of the glenoid close to the anterior edge, usually at the 5- and 2-o’clock positions for the 2.9-mm PushLocks. The remaining threads on the two Mini-TightRopes are passed through the labrum and capsule to the joint and then tightened. Each PushLock took one strand from each Mini-TightRope for fixation. These two PushLocks provide extra fixation of the iliac bone graft by pushing the graft toward the glenoid rim. And the whole procedure is completed.

Hypothesis/background Shoulder dislocations are common orthopedic injuries due to the mobile nature of the glenohumeral joint. High school and collegiate athletes are at particularly high risk for sustaining a dislocation event. Despite the prevalence of these injuries, there is a paucity in the literature regarding incidence of sports-related shoulder dislocations and mechanism of injury within these populations. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to (1) determine the incidence rate of shoulder dislocations in high school-aged and collegiate-aged athletes presenting to emergency departments (EDs) in the United States; (2) to determine the most common sports associated with shoulder dislocations; and (3) to compare the current rates and risk factors for shoulder dislocation with previous trends. Methods The National Electronic Injury Surveillance System is a statistically validated injury surveillance system that collects data from ED visits as a representative probability sample of hospitals in the United States. We queried the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System for the years 2015-2019 to examine the following variables for sports-related shoulder dislocations: patient age (high school = 13-17 years of age; collegiate = 18-23 years of age), sex, year of admission, and sport type. Using a weighted multiplier, annual incidence rates were estimated based on the US Census estimates and injury rates were compared by sex and age group across the study period. Results From 2015 to 2019, there were a total of 1329 athletic-related shoulder dislocations that presented to participating EDs. Of these, 698 (52.5%) shoulder dislocations occurred in collegiate athletes, while 631 (47.5%) occurred in high school athletes. Using weighted and adjusted estimates automatically generated by the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System database, this translates to 89,511 total athletic-related shoulder dislocations across the United States (95% confidence interval lower bound 68,224; 95% confidence interval upper bound 110,798). Male athletes demonstrated a higher proportion of shoulder dislocations (87%) than female athletes (13%). The most common sport-specific mechanisms of traumatic shoulder dislocation were basketball (24.1%), football (21%), soccer (7.1%), baseball (7.1%), and weightlifting (3.3%). Conclusion Sports-related shoulder dislocations are frequent in high school-aged and college-aged athletes presenting to the ED. Interventions to reduce incidence of injury should be sport-specific and focus on those participating in contact and noncontact sports. Male athletes have disproportionately higher rates of dislocation. These findings are consistent with the previous epidemiologic trends in the literature that have examined the incidence of shoulder dislocations in this population.

The Latarjet procedure is used for the treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability in the presence of bone loss. One decade after a fully arthroscopic Latarjet procedure was described, this technique has been modified to reduce the risk of complications and improve the fixation method. We aimed to simplify the components of this surgical procedure., Technique Video Video 1 We present our technique about Modified arthroscopic Latarjet procedure: button fixation without splitting of the subscapularis. The patient was in the “beach chair” position and five portals were created. After a diagnostic arthroscopy examination was performed, the lower surface, tip, base of the coracoid process, and conjoined tendon were identified. The lateral soft tissue of the conjoined tendon was released to a sufficient length to not affect transfer of the coracoid process. The coracoacromial ligament was excised at the insertion of the coracoid to expose its lateral and upper surfaces. Afterwards, the pectoralis minor was released from the coracoid ∼5-cm downwards from the junctions of pectoralis minor and conjoined tendon to ensure that transfer of the coracoid process was not affected The lower surface of the coracoid was freshened and smoothened to match the bone bed of the anterior glenoid with a burr. A thin cannula was used to guide the drilling of two holes in the coracoid bone. A 1.2-mm K-wire was drilled 6.5-mm proximal to the coracoid tip and the second K-wire was drilled 16.5-mm proximal to the coracoid tip. These two holes were 10-mm apart. Two PDS lines were passed through the bone tunnels for traction and guidance, respectively. After ensuring an adequate length of coracoid bone, the coracoid was osteotomized with an 20° osteotome and the length of coracoid graft was < 25 mm. After that, the labrum and capsule were detached completely from the glenoid up to the 6 o’clock position. The glenoid was refreshed by a burr. The upper edge of the subscapularis was pressed downwards by a switching stick until the 4 o’clock and 5 o’clock positions of the anterior glenoid were exposed. The distance from the center point of the glenoid tunnel to the edge of the anterior glenoid was determined according to the coracoid width (in this case, the coracoid width was 12 mm, the distance from the center point of the glenoid tunnel to the edge of the bone graft was 6 mm). Two drills were employed to create two tunnels at 3:30 and 4:30 o’clock positions. Two Mini TightRopes were used for fixation. The long buttons were passed through the coracoid bone and from the anterior to posterior directions of the glenoid bone following the guidance of the suture. When the long buttons were passed through the posterior wall of the glenoid bone then turned over for fixation. After the position of the coracoid graft had been confirmed, the anterior round buttons of the Mini TightRope were tightened. The position of the coracoid bone and its relationship with the subscapularis was examined after fixation.

Rugby has the highest incidence of traumatic injuries of any sport, and glenohumeral injuries result in the lengthy delay in return to play. The purpose of this study is to survey surgeons from the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) to evaluate the current state of management of anterior glenohumeral instability, and compare the differences in practices.A survey of surgeons from ASES and BESS was conducted. Treatment options were proposed in a variety of clinical scenarios of glenohumeral instability. The time of immobilization post-operatively, return to play, and attitudes on current contact regulations. Results were compared using the chi-square test or t-test.Ninety-seven surgeons responded to the survey. There was a significant difference in treatment between ASES and BESS surgeons in the setting of primary dislocation (p 0.05), but not recurrent dislocation (p 0.05). The period of immobilization following injury and surgery was different between both treating groups. There was a significant difference in return to play between ASES and BESS surgeons with arthroscopic stabilization and open Bankart repair (p 0.05), but not following conservative treatment or the Latarjet procedure (p 0.05).There remains wide variance on the management of glenohumeral instability in rugby union players among surgeons. While immobilization times post-operatively were similar, the BESS surgeons were more confident in allowing earlier return to play. There is also a significant concern that contact levels should be regulated to protect player safety.Level 4 (case series).

Cartilage defects of the humeral head in young, active patients provide a challenge to treating surgeons. The causes of humeral head osteochondral lesions are variable, but these lesions most commonly result from trauma and recurrent glenohumeral instability. Palliative and reparative techniques such as arthroscopic debridement and microfracture have traditionally been used as surgical treatment but have high failure rates. Similarly to surgical trends in the knee, cartilage restoration in the shoulder is becoming more prevalent in younger patients. Osteochondral allograft transplantation (OAT) has been used as a joint-preserving surgical option to restore hyaline cartilage in multiple joints for decades. Although OAT is more commonly used to re-establish the subchondral bony architecture in the treatment of recurrent shoulder instability, the procedure may also be indicated in young, active patients with focal humeral head chondral defects. OAT has been shown in early studies to provide improvement in functional outcome scores and good long-term graft survival with relatively low rates of complications. This report describes our straightforward, reproducible technique for the treatment of large, oblong chondral defects of the humeral head using OAT., Technique Video Video 1 Deltopectoral exposure of a right shoulder with a large, oblong chondral lesion. The lesion is measured, and a fresh humeral allograft is prepared for harvest. The corresponding area of the humeral allograft is measured and harvested using the elliptical cutting system instrumentation. The graft is soaked in autologous plasma while the recipient site is prepared using the elliptical cutting system instrumentation. The graft is implanted into the humeral head, and postoperative radiographs are viewed.

Background The investigation of Hill-Sachs and bony Bankart lesions continues to evolve. Patients with large bone lesions can present with a positive apprehension test even at ranges below 45° of abduction and external rotation of the shoulder. Modern concepts, such as glenoid track and quantification of glenoid bone loss, have been increasingly applied to shoulder instability. The objective of this study was to assess the correlation of the glenoid track and glenoid bone loss on the apprehension test conducted at 0°, 45°, and 90° of shoulder abduction. Methods Ninety-four shoulders of 90 patients with anterior glenohumeral instability were retrospectively assessed. The apprehension test was performed at 0°, 45°, and 90° of shoulder abduction. Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or magnetic resonance arthrogram scans were performed to calculate the glenoid track and glenoid bone loss. A descriptive analysis, an association analysis, and a logistic regression analysis were used in this study. Logistic regression analysis was used to assess the influence of glenoid track and glenoid bone loss when the apprehension test was positive in lower degrees of abduction. Results A positive apprehension test at 0°, 45°, and 90° of abduction revealed significant association with off-track lesions, glenoid bone losses greater than 13.5%, and bipolar bone lesions. Shoulders classified as off-track were 36.4 times more likely to test positive at 0°, 45°, and 90° than on-track shoulders. The logistic regression analysis revealed that the positive apprehension test at 0°, 45°, and 90° of abduction seems to be more influenced by off-track lesions than by glenoid bone loss greater than the 13.5% threshold. Conclusion Shoulders with a positive apprehension test at 0°, 45°, and 90° are significantly associated with off-track lesions, bipolar bone lesions, and glenoid bone losses greater than 13.5%.

Purpose Surgical treatment of shoulder instability caused by anterior glenoid bone loss is based on a critical threshold of the defect size. Recent studies indicate that the glenoid concavity is essential for glenohumeral stability. However, biomechanical proof of this principle is lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether glenoid concavity allows a more precise assessment of glenohumeral stability than the defect size alone. Methods The stability ratio (SR) is a biomechanical estimate of glenohumeral stability. It is defined as the maximum dislocating force the joint can resist related to a medial compression force. This ratio was determined for 17 human cadaveric glenoids in a robotic test setup depending on osteochondral concavity and anterior defect size. Bony defects were created gradually, and a 3D measuring arm was used for morphometric measurements. The influence of defect size and concavity on the SR was examined using linear models. In addition, the morphometrical-based bony shoulder stability ratio (BSSR) was evaluated to prove its suitability for estimation of glenohumeral stability independent of defect size. Results Glenoid concavity is a significant predictor for the SR, while the defect size provides minor informative value. The linear model featured a high goodness of fit with a determination coefficient of R2 = 0.98, indicating that 98% of the SR is predictable by concavity and defect size. The low mean squared error (MSE) of 4.2% proved a precise estimation of the SR. Defect size as an exclusive predictor in the linear model reduced R2 to 0.9 and increased the MSE to 25.7%. Furthermore, the loss of SR with increasing defect size was shown to be significantly dependent on the initial concavity. The BSSR as a single predictor for glenohumeral stability led to highest precision with MSE = 3.4%. Conclusion Glenoid concavity is a crucial factor for the SR. Independent of the defect size, the computable BSSR is a precise biomechanical estimate of the measured SR. The inclusion of glenoid concavity has the potential to influence clinical decision-making for an improved and personalised treatment of glenohumeral instability with anterior glenoid bone loss.

Background Significant bone defects are associated with poor clinical results after surgical stabilization in cases of glenohumeral instability. Although multiple factors are thought to adversely affect enlargement of bipolar bone loss and increased shoulder instability, these factors have not been sufficiently evaluated. The purpose of this study was to identify the factors related to greater bone defects and a higher number of instability episodes in patients with glenohumeral instability. Methods A total of 120 consecutive patients with symptomatic unilateral instability of the glenohumeral joint were retrospectively reviewed. Three-dimensional surface-rendered/registered models of bilateral glenoids and proximal humeri from computed tomography data were matched by software, and the volumes of bone defects identified in the glenoid and humeral head were assessed. After relationships between objective variables and explanatory variables were evaluated using bivariate analyses, factors related to large bone defects in the glenoid and humeral head and a high number of total instability episodes and self-irreducible dislocations greater than the respective 75th percentiles were evaluated using logistic regression analyses with significant variables on bivariate analyses. Results Larger humeral head defects (P < .001) and a higher number of total instability episodes (P = .032) were found to be factors related to large glenoid defects. On the other hand, male sex (P = .014), larger glenoid defects (P = .015), and larger number of self-irreducible dislocations (P = .027) were related to large humeral head bone defects. An increased number of total instability episodes was related to longer symptom duration (P = .001) and larger glenoid defects (P = .002), and an increased number of self-irreducible dislocations was related to larger humeral head defects (P = .007). Conclusions Whereas this study showed that bipolar lesions affect the amount of bone defects reciprocally, factors related to greater bone defects differed between the glenoid and the humeral head. Glenoid defects were related to the number of total instability episodes, whereas humeral head defects were related to the number of self-irreducible dislocations.

Background: There is a lack of evidence in the literature comparing outcomes between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure in competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss Purpose: To compare return to sport, functional outcomes, and complications between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure in competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Between June 2010 and February 2018, 130 competitive rugby players with anterior shoulder instability were operated on in our institution. The first 80 patients were operated on with the arthroscopic Bankart procedure and the other 50 with the open Latarjet procedure. Return to sport, range of motion (ROM), the Rowe score, and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) were used to assess functional outcomes. Recurrences, reoperations, and complications were also evaluated. Results: In the total population, the mean follow-up was 40 months (range, 24-90 months) and the mean age was 24.2 years (range, 16-33 years). Ninety-two percent of patients were able to return to rugby, 88% at their preinjury level of play. Eighty-nine percent of patients in the Bankart group and 87% in the Latarjet group returned to compete at the same level ( P = .788). No significant difference in shoulder ROM was found between preoperative and postoperative results. The Rowe and ASOSS scores showed statistical improvement after operation ( P < .01). No significant difference in functional scores was found between the groups The Rowe score in the Bankart group increased from a preoperative mean (± SD) of 41 ± 13 points to 89.7 points postoperatively, and in the Latarjet group, from a preoperative mean of 42.5 ± 14 points to 88.4 points postoperatively ( P = .95). The ASOSS score in the Bankart group increased from a preoperative mean of 53.3 ± 3 points to 93.3 ± 6 points postoperatively, and in the Latarjet group, from a preoperative mean of 53.1 ± 3 points to 93.7 ± 4 points postoperatively ( P = .95). There were 18 recurrences (14%). The rate of recurrence was 20% in the Bankart group and 4% in the Latarjet group ( P = .01). There were 15 reoperations (12%). The rate of reoperation was 16% in the Bankart group and 4% in the Latarjet group ( P = .03). There were 6 complications (5%). The rate of complications was 4% in the Bankart group and 6% in the Latarjet group ( P = .55). The proportion of postoperative osteoarthritis was 10% in the Bankart group (8/80 patients) and 12% (6/50 patients) in the Latarjet group ( P = .55). Conclusion: In competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss

Purpose: To analyze return to sports, functional outcomes, and complications following the Latarjet procedure in competitive athletes with anterior glenohumeral instability and glenoid bone loss

Introduction: Fragment-type glenoid bone loss is known to remodel after arthroscopic Bankart repair. To our knowledge, no studies have been reported about the morphologic changes of the erosion-type bone loss. Aim: To determine the morphologic changes of erosion-type glenoid bone loss after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Methods: Twenty-eight patients (mean age: 31 years) with traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability with an erosion-type glenoid bone loss

The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term outcomes including medical complications, overnight admission, and 30-day readmission with regard to patient age at the time of shoulder instability surgery.Patients undergoing surgery for glenohumeral instability were collected from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program between the years of 2005 and 2016. These patients were separated into cohorts of younger than 25 years, 25-34 years, and older than 34 years. Medical complications, hospital admission, and 30-day readmission were compared using multivariate analysis.Of the 5449 patients included, there were 2035 (37.0%) patients younger than 25 years, 1815 (33.0%) between 25 and 34 years, and 1649 (30.0%) 35 and older. Overall, 81.7% of patients underwent an arthroscopic Bankart repair, 12.6% of patients underwent an open Bankart repair, and 5.7% of patients underwent a Latarjet-Bristow procedure. The risk of 30-day readmission increased with age, ranging from 0.24% for25 years old to 0.92% for 35 years and older (P = .040). Operative duration greater than 60 minutes (odds ratio [OR] 1.76; P = .001), duration greater than 90 minutes (OR 3.58; P.001), and American Society of Anesthesiologists class III and IV (OR 1.80; P = .001) were associated with increased risk of overnight hospital stay. Compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair, the Latarjet-Bristow procedure was associated with increased total complications (OR 3.30; P = .021), overnight hospital stay (OR 4.64; P.001), and 30-day readmission (OR 3.39; P = .013).This study demonstrates that even in the relatively young and healthy shoulder instability patient cohort, patients older than 25 years are almost 4 times more likely to experience a complication. Additionally, Latarjet-Bristow procedures are 3-4 times more likely to experience a complication or readmission than other shoulder instability procedures.

Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic labral repair for anteroinferior glenohumeral instability with the use of double-loaded suture anchors. Methods: This study evaluated a series of consecutive patients treated after the senior author changed from single- to double-loaded suture anchors for the treatment of anteroinferior glenohumeral instability with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. We collected the following outcomes at final follow-up: visual analog scale pain score, Simple Shoulder Test score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and instability recurrence data. Results: A total of 41 consecutive patients underwent arthroscopic labral repair with double-loaded anchors, of whom 30 (71%) were able to be contacted at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. These patients included 4 contact or collision athletes (13%). The patients had an average of 12 ± 13 prior dislocations over an average period of 56 ± 57 months preoperatively. Mean glenoid bone loss measured 16% ± 10%, and 67% (18 of 27 patients) had glenoid bone loss ≥ 13.5%. Intraoperatively, 3.2 ± 0.4 anchors were used. No posterior repairs or remplissage procedures were performed. At an average of 6.7 ± 2.7 years' follow-up, the visual analog scale pain score was 0.8 ± 1.4; Simple Shoulder Test score, 11 ± 2; and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, 90 ± 14. Patients with bone loss < 13.5% had a 0% redislocation rate and 11% subluxation rate, whereas those with bone loss ≥ 13.5% had a 6% reoperation rate, 22% redislocation rate, and 22% subluxation rate. Conclusion: Arthroscopic labral repair with double-loaded anchors provides satisfactory clinical results at early to mid-term outcome assessment when glenoid bone loss is

Background: Coracoid graft positioning, fixation, and bone union are key factors affecting the clinical outcomes of Bristow and Latarjet procedures. We developed an arthroscopic “inlay” Bristow procedure based on the “mortise-tenon” joint structure concept using suture button fixation to achieve more stable fixation and better bone union of the graft. Purpose: To evaluate the positioning of the coracoid graft, bone union rate, and clinical outcomes of this arthroscopic inlay Bristow procedure with suture button fixation. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A total of 62 patients who received the arthroscopic inlay Bristow procedure with suture button fixation between June 2015 to June 2016 were eligible for inclusion, and 56 patients who met the inclusion criteria were enrolled in this study. Radiological assessment on 3-dimensional computed tomography scan was performed preoperatively, immediately after the operation, and postoperatively at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and the final follow-up. Pre- and postoperative clinical results were also assessed. Results: A total of 56 patients were included in this study. The mean ± SD follow-up time was 36.1 ± 3.7 months. Coracoid grafts (middle point) were positioned at 4 o’clock (range, 123.8°± 12.3°) in the sagittal view. In the axial view, 94.6% (53/56) of the graft positioning was measured as flush and 5.4% (3/56) as medial. Neither lateral nor too medial positioning was noted. The bone union rate was 96.4% at final follow-up. The mean visual analog scale score for pain during motion, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and Rowe score all improved significantly after surgery—from 4.8 ± 2.6 to 1.1 ± 1.0, 69.2 ± 12.5 to 92.5 ± 7.0, and 33.5 ± 12.1 to 96.0 ± 4.9 at last follow-up, respectively. Almost all patients (98%; 55/56) returned to sports within 1 year after surgery at the same or higher level as compared with their preinjury performance. The mean subjective value for sports participation was 90.3% ± 7.1% (range, 70%-100%) as compared with the normal shoulder. The overall complication rate was 3.6%. No degenerative changes were noted in any patients. Conclusion: This study reported the first series of an inlay Bristow procedure with suture button fixation for recurrent shoulder dislocation, providing a satisfactory union rate and excellent graft positioning with a low complication rate. The mortise-tenon joint structure can provide excellent graft fixation and healing, while using suture button fixation instead of screw fixation could reduce osteolysis and complications related to hardware implantation.

The stability of the glenohumeral joint depends on soft tissue stabilizers, bone morphology and dynamic stabilizers such as the rotator cuff and long head of the biceps tendon. Shoulder stabilization techniques include anatomic procedures such as repair of the labrum or restoration of bone loss, but also non-anatomic options such as remplissage or tendon transfers. Rotator cuff repair should restore the cuff anatomy, reattach the rotator cable and respect the coracoacromial arch whenever possible. Tendon transfer, superior capsular reconstruction or balloon implantation have been proposed for irreparable lesions. Shoulder rehabilitation should focus on restoring balanced glenohumeral and scapular force couples in order to avoid an upward migration of the humeral head and secondary cuff impingement. The primary goal of cuff repair is to be as anatomic as possible and to create a biomechanically favourable environment for tendon healing.Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:508-518. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200006

Background Allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) reconstruction of the proximal humerus is a technique for reconstruction of large bone deficits, provides improvement in pain and function, and is thought to restore bone if revision surgery is needed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of proximal humeral APCs to restore usable bone at the time of revision surgery. Methods Two institutional electronic medical records were reviewed to evaluate proximal humeral APC procedures performed between 1970 and 2018. We identified 115 cases, of which 14 underwent revision for aseptic causes. The indications for revision included nonunion (n = 7), glenohumeral instability (n = 5), and allograft fracture (n = 2). Three categories were used to classify the amount of usable allograft retained at revision surgery: type A, complete allograft retention; type B, partial retention; and type C, no retention. Results A total of 14 patients (6 male and 8 female patients) underwent revision of the APC reconstruction at a mean of 22.8 months. At revision, allograft retention was classified as type A in 6 shoulders, type B in 3, and type C in 5. Type A cases were associated with nonunion with a well-fixed stem, type B cases were associated with instability and were converted from a hemiarthroplasty to a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, and type C cases were associated with an allograft fracture or nonunion with a loose humeral component. Conclusion A substantial number of revisions of proximal humeral APC reconstructions maintain a portion of the allograft bone (64.3%). This study supports the ongoing use of the APC reconstruction technique for large bone deficits.

Background: Although surgical shoulder stabilization is a substantial cost nationally within the United States, little information exists to analyze this cost. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with variation in direct costs with the arthroscopic treatment of glenohumeral instability. Methods: This was a retrospective study of all patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment of glenohumeral instability between January 12, 2012 and July 11, 2017. Patient and procedure factors were collected. Direct perioperative costs were collected using a validated internal tool. Patient and procedure characteristics significantly associated with costs were identified using multivariate generalized linear models. Results: The study included 302 patients, of whom 12% were undergoing revision and 32% were contact or collision athletes. Anterior instability was present in 73%, whereas 14% had posterior and 10% had multidirectional instability. Of the patients, 67% were recurrent dislocators and 33% were first-time dislocators or subluxators. Remplissage was performed in 13%; biceps tenodesis, 5%; and rotator cuff repair, 3%. An average of 4.0 ± 1.4 anchors were used. Of costs, 39% were operative facility utilization costs and 41% were implant costs. Factors associated with cost increase included an increased number of anchors (P < .0001), posterior vs. anterior instability (P = .001), recurrent instability vs. first-time dislocation (P = .025), remplissage (P = .006), rotator interval closure (P = .021), bicep tenodesis (P = .020), rotator cuff repair (P < .0001), an inpatient stay (P = .003), and repair of humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments (P = .012). Conclusion: Most perioperative costs associated with the arthroscopic treatment of glenohumeral instability are facility utilization and implant costs. Nonmodifiable factors associated with increased cost included posterior direction of instability and recurrent instability. Modifiable factors included additional procedures and inpatient stay.

To compare rates of recurrent instability, revision surgery and functional outcomes following arthroscopic anterior capsulolabral repair for recurrent anterior instability using knot-tying versus knotless suture anchor techniques. Patients who had undergone arthroscopic anterior labrum and capsular repair for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability using knotless anchors were identified. Those with minimum 2-year follow-up were matched (1:2) to knot-tying anchor repair patients. Rates of failure and recurrent instability were compared, as well as Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and Rowe scores. One hundred and two patients (89 males, 13 females) with a mean age of 24.3 ± 9.6 were included. Repair was performed with knotless anchors in 34 and knot-tying anchors in 68 shoulders. At mean follow-up of 4.8 ± 2.5 years, re-dislocation rates between groups were not significantly different (knotless anchor: 9% versus knot-tying group: 15%, n.s.), but the knot-tying group showed a higher re-subluxation rate (p = 0.039). 12 (18%) revisions were performed in the knot-tying group at a mean 2.9 years after surgery and 1 (3%) revision in the knotless anchors group at 1.4 years (n.s.). There was no difference in mean VAS with use (1.3 ± 1.9 versus 0.8 ± 1.5, n.s.), SANE scores (91.8 ± 12.7 versus 92.0 ± 11.0, n.s.), QuickDASH scores (4.1 ± 5.5 versus 3.0 ± 6.5, n.s.), UCLA Shoulder Score (32.5 ± 3.6 versus 33.2 ± 3.1, n.s.), or Rowe scores (90.5 ± 18.5 versus 92.2 ± 16.6, n.s.) between knotless and knot-tying groups, respectively. VAS at rest was higher in the knotless group (0.7 ± 1.5 vs 0.1 ± 0.4, p = 0.021). Knotless anchors demonstrated similar rates of re-dislocation and revision surgery, and lower rates of recurrent subluxation, compared to knot-tying anchors. Patients achieved good-to-excellent functional outcomes. This supports the efficacy of knotless anchors as an alternative to knot-tying anchors for arthroscopic anterior labral repair of recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. III.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes of open versus arthroscopic Latarjet procedures. Methods Between December 2009 to January 2015, all patients older than 18 years of age who were treated with a Latarjet procedure for chronic osseous anterior instability by a single surgeon were included in this retrospective cohort study. Range of motion, strength, Rowe, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores, and pain level according to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) were evaluated. In addition, postoperative computed tomography scans were used to evaluate the position of the transferred coracoid, screw orientation, and degree of graft resorption. Results Forty-eight patients with a mean age of 29.5 years (range 19-59 years) who underwent open (n = 15; group OL) and arthroscopic (n = 33; group AL) Latarjet procedures were included in the study. The mean follow-up was 30.5 months (range 24-50 months). At final follow-up there were significant differences in the mean internal rotation loss (mean of 9° vs 14°, P = .044) favoring open surgery and WOSI (P = .017) scores favoring arthroscopic. No significant differences were detected in mean forward flexion loss (P = .918), external rotation loss (P = .883), Rowe (P = .429), and Visual Analog Scale (P = .208) scores. Mean superoinferior position of the coracoid bone graft was found between the 1:55 and 4:49 o’clock positions (2:05-4:55 for group OL; 1:51-4:47 for group AL) in en-face views. The grafts were placed laterally in 13% (group OL) and 9% (group AL) of patients. The mean α angles of the screws were 11° and 19.2°, respectively (P = .004). The mean graft resorption rates were 21% and 34% (P = .087), respectively. Conclusion Good functional results were obtained after both open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for the treatment of chronic osseous anterior shoulder instability. Comparative analysis showed small but statistically significant differences in internal rotation loss favoring open and in WOSI favoring arthroscopic techniques. All measured radiographic parameters were similar with the exception of a significant difference in alpha angle with improved screw position in open surgery. OL and AL techniques provide similar clinical and radiographic outcomes. Level of Evidence III; Retrospective cohort study with comparison group.

The recurrence of shoulder instability is a challenging complication after anterior open or arthroscopic stabilization in patients with glenohumeral instability. Use of the arthroscopic Bankart procedure has increased over the last decade, because of its less invasiveness and low complication rates compared with the Latarjet procedure. However, arthroscopic repair has the possibility of a greater recurrent instability rate. The Instability Shoulder Index Score (ISIS) has been developed to predict the success of isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for the management of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The risk factors associated with the recurrence of instability are age, level and type of sports participation, shoulder hyperlaxity, and humeral and glenoid bony lesions. The ISIS is a validated tool to predict the recurrence of dislocation after arthroscopic surgery in patients with shoulder instability. The arthroscopic Bankart procedure can be performed in patients with ISIS ≤3 with a low risk of recurrence of glenohumeral instability. The Latarjet procedure should be recommended in patients with ISIS >6. The management of patients with ISIS between 4 and 6 is still controversial and ranges from arthroscopic Bankart procedure with the addition of remplissage to the Latarjet procedure. Because advanced imaging techniques, such as computed tomography scans, allow us to assess appropriately the glenoid and humeral bone defect, their use is recommended in addition to ISIS.

Background The literature has reported debatable diagnostic accuracy of clinical provocative tests for a type II superior labral anteroposterior (SLAP) lesion, especially in the context of a type V SLAP (concurrent Bankart and type II SLAP) lesion. This study was conducted to determine whether the investigated provocative tests offer reliable predictive values in the diagnosis of type II SLAP lesions in patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral (GH) instability. Methods This prospective case-control study carried out between September 2014 and September 2018 included 51 patients with post-traumatic recurrent anterior GH instability. Patients were prospectively evaluated for type II SLAP lesions by 9 provocative tests: Jobe relocation test, abduction–external rotation test, anterior slide test, biceps load test I, biceps load test II, pain provocation test, labral tension test, crank test, and the O'Driscoll dynamic labral shear test. The results of these tests were compared with findings of diagnostic arthroscopic GH examinations (control). Results Statistical analysis revealed the mean age of the studied group to be 26.1 ± 7.56 years, with male predominance (50 patients; 98.04%). Arthroscopic examination revealed a Bankart lesion in isolation and in association with a type II SLAP lesion (ie, a type V SLAP lesion) in 15 (29.4%) and 36 (70.6%) patients, respectively. The anterior slide test yielded the highest positive and lowest negative likelihood ratios (2.91 and 0.52, respectively). Conclusion Except for the anterior slide test, which can be validated for the clinical diagnosis of type II SLAP lesions in patients with traumatic recurrent anterior GH instability, the investigated tests offer poor predictive values and should be cautiously used in clinical practice.

Background. Displaced distal clavicular fractures are generally operated on because of the high nonunion rate after nonoperative treatment. Several surgical techniques have been developed to reduce the nonunion rate and improve functional outcomes. One of them is closed reduction and minimally invasive coracoclavicular double-button fixation, which requires the integrity of the coracoid process to be performed. Case Summary. We present a 35-year-old male patient who had been successfully subjected to a modified Latarjet procedure for glenohumeral instability with bony defect treatment, and 7 months later suffered a distal clavicle fracture in his ipsilateral shoulder. With a CT scan, we analyzed the coracoid remnant size (7 mm), and we consider it enough to perform a minimally invasive double-button technique, using this remnant as a distal fixation. Postoperative and Follow-Up. Radiographic and clinical fracture union occurred 10 weeks after the procedure. The patient returned to sports at the same level he had before surgery and achieved full strength and range of motion. Conclusion. Closed reduction and minimally invasive double-button fixation of displaced distal clavicular fractures is a safe, reproducible, and versatile technique, which can even be performed without an intact coracoid process.

Background Although glenohumeral instability is common, the mechanism of instability remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively evaluate humeral head translation during active external rotation with abduction in patients with glenohumeral instability by use of 4-dimensional computed tomography scans. Methods Ten patients with unilateral glenohumeral instability with a positive fulcrum test were prospectively included in this study. Sequential computed tomography of bilateral shoulders during active external rotation at 90° of shoulder abduction was performed for 6 seconds at 5 frames per second. The 3-dimensional positions of the humeral head center in the anteroposterior, superoinferior, and mediolateral directions were calculated at 0°, 20°, 40°, 60°, and maximum shoulder abduction–external rotation from the starting position. Translation of the humeral head center from the starting position was evaluated using Dunnett multiple-comparison tests, and the differences between the affected and intact shoulders were assessed using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Results The humeral head center translated posteriorly, inferiorly, and medially during glenohumeral external rotation with the shoulder in the abducted position on the intact side. However, the affected humeral head showed significantly less posterior translation (P = .028), greater inferior translation (P = .047), and less medial translation (P = .037) than the contralateral side. Conclusions This study indicated that dysfunction of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament causes decreased posterior, increased inferior, and decreased medial translation of the humeral head during active shoulder abduction–external rotation.

Quantifying bone loss is important to decide the best treatment for patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. Currently, there is no standard method available to make a precise evaluation of the Hill-Sachs lesion and predict its engagement before the surgical procedure. This literature review was performed in order to identify existing published imaging methods quantifying humeral head bone loss in Hill-Sachs lesions.Searches were undertaken in Scopus and PubMed databases from January 2008 until February 2018. The search terms were "Hill-Sachs" and "measurement" for the initial search and "Hill-Sachs bone loss" for the second, to be present in the keywords, abstracts and title. All articles that presented a method for quantifying measurement of Hill-Sachs lesions were analysed.Several methods are currently available to evaluate Hill-Sachs lesions. The length, width and depth measurements on CT scans show strong inter and intra-observer correlation coefficients. Three-dimensional CT is helpful for evaluation of bony injuries; however, there were no significant differences between 3D CT and 3D MRI measurements. The on-track off-track method using MRI allows a simultaneous evaluation of the Hill-Sachs and glenoid bone loss and also predicts the engaging lesions with good accuracy. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:151-157. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180031. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Case A 21-year-old woman with a history of multiple failed surgical and conservative management for recurrent involuntary shoulder instability presented with 1-year history of shoulder pain. Physical examination demonstrated intractable static anterior glenohumeral instability, deficient capsular tissue, with reducible scapular winging secondary to long thoracic nerve palsy. Allograft capsular reconstruction and open split pectoralis major tendon transfer were performed to salvage shoulder motion and stabilize her shoulder girdle. Conclusion This report presents a novel repair option for intractable shoulder instability and scapular winging. Surgeons should recognize potential causes of shoulder instability and familiarize themselves with multiple stabilization techniques as potential salvage options before glenohumeral fusion.

Background: Anterior recurrent glenohumeral instability is a common clinical entity, particularly among young athletic patient population with glenoid defect greater than 20%. Glenoid reconstruction with bone graft has become the treatment of choice.Aim of the work: evaluate the role of arthroscopic assisted reconstruction in management of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability associated with glenoid insufficiency.Patients and Methods: Our prospective study was conducted involving 30 cases with anterior shoulder instability associated with glenoid defect more than 20%. All patients were operated at Zagazig University Hospitals. All cases were surgically managed by arthroscopic assisted reconstruction the glenoid defect by bone graft. 15 cases with coracoid process and 15 cases with tricortical iliac crest graft.Results: 30 patients were followed up for 12 monthes. All patients showed significant improving in the range of motions. No dislocation or subluxation recorded in any patients. All graft complete bony union except one showed fibrous union. UCLA and Consatnt score highly significant improved postoperative. Conclusion: Soft-tissue stabilization procedures for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability were proved to be less effective with high recurrence rate up to 67% in patients with extensive glenoid bone loss >20 %. So, bone grafting techniques instead of soft tissue stabilization procedures in the case of extensive glenoid bone loss > 20 %.

The congruent-arc Latarjet (CAL) allows reconstruction of a greater percentage of glenoid bone deficit because the inferior surface of the coracoid is wider than the lateral edge of the coracoid used with the traditional Latarjet (TL). Biomechanical studies have shown higher initial fixation strength between the graft and the glenoid with the TL. In the TL, the undersurface of the coracoid, which is wider than the medial edge used with the CAL, remains in contact with the anterior edge of the glenoid, increasing the contact surface between both bones and thus facilitating bone consolidation. The shorter bone distance around the screw with the CAL is potentially less tolerant of screw-positioning error compared to the TL. Moreover, the wall of the screw tunnel is potentially more likely to fracture with the CAL due to the minimal space between the screw and the graft wall. CAL may be very difficult to perform in patients with very small coracoids such as small women or skeletally immature patients. Radius of curvature of the inferior face of the coracoid graft (used with the CAL) is similar to that of the native glenoid. This may potentially decrease contact pressure across the glenohumeral joint, avoiding degenerative changes in the long term. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:280-287. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200074

Background: Posterior glenoid bone loss occurs in more than two-thirds of patients with posterior glenohumeral instability, with 14% to 22% having greater than subcritical bone loss (13.5%), a marker for potential need for bony augmentation versus soft tissue-only procedures. Several techniques are described to augment either the version or volume of the glenoid surface including osteotomies, autograft transfers, and allograft tibia transfers. Indications: Arthroscopic-assisted allograft distal tibia bone block augmentation to the posterior glenoid is indicated for revision posterior instability procedures with posterior bone loss and in primary cases of posterior instability with critical bone loss. Technique Description: Arthroscopic posterior glenoid reconstruction with allograft distal tibia and posterior labral repair in the lateral position is presented. This technique uses standard instrument sets and requires no patient repositioning. The preplanned tibial bone block is prepared on a back table either prior to, or concurrently with, arthroscopic procedure. After creation of high posterior portal and standard anterior portal, a sucker-shaver and burr are used to create a perpendicular edge for apposition of the allograft tibia. The bone block is introduced through a longitudinal incision and underdelivered to the prepared surface under the liberated labrum. The articular surface of the graft and glenoid are aligned and cannulated screws are used to compress the bone block against the native glenoid. The posterior labral tissue is then mobilized over the graft and repaired to the native glenoid. Results: Arthroscopic distal tibial allograft augmentation for posterior bone loss restored stability and function in a small cohort of patients. Patients reported improved stability in the immediate postoperative course, with restoration of motion by 2 months. Push-ups, pull-ups, and return to full active duty without restrictions is allowed at 6 months postoperatively. Imaging at 3 months postoperatively has shown excellent graft healing. Discussion: The benefits of allograft tibia augmentation for posterior instability with glenoid bone loss include an anatomic joint surface restoration including articular cartilage, lack of donor site morbidity, and a minimally invasive approach. When performed arthroscopically, this technique permits concurrent posterior labral repair and anatomic reconstruction.

Cases Three patients (age, 15-34 years) who had a history of chronic traumatic anteroinferior glenohumeral instability (2-10 dislocations) and preoperatively documented Bankart and Hill-Sachs lesions underwent all-arthroscopic trans-subscapular transposition of the long head of the biceps that was fixed on the anteroinferior glenoid using a novel double double-pulley all-suture anchor method that has not been reported previously. Conclusion Excellent 12-month clinical and imaging outcomes, with substantial improvements in the Western Ontario Shoulder Index and the Rowe score in the first consecutive patients who underwent this original technical variant of dynamic anterior stabilization and the surgical pearls and pitfalls are described in detail.

Posterior shoulder dislocations are an uncommon cause of glenohumeral instability; they are frequently missed and are associated with humeral head defects and capsulolabral lesions. Despite surgical treatment often being mandatory, there is still no standardized treatment for anterior impaction fractures of the humeral head (reverse Hill-Sachs lesions). Arthroscopic surgery is typically indicated, with a tendency toward resorting to knotless techniques in recent years. We present a method for the treatment of posterior shoulder dislocations with engaging reverse Hill-Sachs lesions that achieves full defect coverage using an arthroscopic all-in-the-box knotless subscapularis bridge technique with 2 anchors—with one crossing the subscapularis tendon and the other embracing it—along with posterior capsulolabral complex restoration. This promising technique is a potentially superior alternative for the treatment of these lesions that can also be used in the presence of concomitant partial subscapularis tears.

Patients with a greater risk of recurrent instability and inferior clinical outcomes following a primary Latarjet procedure can be preoperatively identified on the basis of clinical, radiographic, and demographic criteria. The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors influencing the rates of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability and clinical failure following a primary Latarjet procedure.All patients who underwent a primary Latarjet procedure were prospectively enrolled and evaluated. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) outcome scores were collected at a minimum 5-year follow-up along with evidence of recurrent instability. Recurrent instability (recurrent subluxation or dislocation) was considered as a failure. Clinical failure was defined as a postoperative WOSI score of ≥630 points (≤70% normal) or a SANE score of ≤70 points.From 2004 to 2014, 344 patients (358 shoulders) with a mean age of 30.6 years (range, 16 to 68 years) were enrolled and had a mean follow-up time of 75 months (range, 61 to 89 months). The median postoperative WOSI score was 265 points (range, 0 to 1,100 points), and the median SANE score was 88 points (range, 50 to 100 points). Recurrence occurred in 17 shoulders (4.7%), 5 with dislocation and 12 with subluxation; and 28 (8.2%) of 341 shoulders without recurrent instability were clinical failures following a Latarjet procedure. The risk factors for recurrence included atraumatic dislocation (odds ratio [OR], 4.6; p0.01) and bilateral instability (OR, 4.0; p = 0.01), whereas the risk factors for clinical failure (WOSI score of ≥630 points or SANE score of ≤70 points) were female sex (OR, 2.8; p0.01) and bilateral instability (OR, 4.6; p = 0.01).Outcomes at a mean of6 years following a primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability were very good, with an overall recurrence rate of 4.7%. An additional 8.2% of cases were defined as clinical failures. Patients with an atraumatic mechanism of primary dislocation, bilateral instability, and female sex were identified to be at a greater risk of recurrence or clinical failure. Although additional work is necessary, patients with capsuloligamentous laxity, relatively atraumatic instability history, bilateral instability, and female sex may be preoperatively identified as having a higher risk of treatment failure after a primary Latarjet procedure.Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

There were 2 main purposes in this study: (1) to report on clinical outcomes of the Latarjet procedure without remplissage in athletes with glenoid bone defects greater than 25% and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions and (2) to determine whether the isolated Latarjet procedure converted off-track Hill-Sachs lesions to on-track Hill-Sachs lesions as measured on computed tomography (CT).During the study period, a total of 29 athletes who had anterior glenohumeral instability with glenoid bone defects greater than 25% and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions, who underwent Latarjet surgery, and who had a minimum follow-up period of 24 months were included in this study. The glenoid track was analyzed before and 3 months after the procedure using 3-dimensional CT. Return to sport and range of motion, as well as the Rowe score, visual analog scale score for pain during sports activity, and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System score, were used to assess functional outcomes. Recurrences were also evaluated.The mean follow-up period was 35 months (standard deviation [SD], 6 months), and the mean age was 30 years (SD, 2 years). Of the patients, 27 (93%) were able to return to sports and 25 (86%) returned to the same level as before their injury. No significant difference in shoulder range of motion was found between preoperative and postoperative results. The Rowe, visual analog scale, and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System scores showed statistically significant improvements after surgery (P.001). The mean width of the glenoid pathway changed significantly from 21.5 mm (SD, 2.54 mm) in the preoperative period to 35.1 mm (SD, 5.46 mm) at 3 months' follow-up. All the Hill-Sachs lesions remained on track, and no patient had recurrence of instability at the end of follow-up. No complications occurred in this series.The Latarjet procedure was effective to restore stability in athletes with recurrent glenohumeral instability with glenoid bone defects greater than 25% and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions, avoiding recurrence in all patients after an average follow-up period of 35 months. Moreover, the Latarjet procedure converted all off-track Hill-Sachs lesions to on-track Hill-Sachs lesions as measured on CT.Level IV, retrospective case series.

Background: Glenoid bone loss (GBL) has been implicated as a risk factor for failure of arthroscopic anterior glenohumeral instability repair. Although certain amounts of GBL are associated with higher recurrence rates, there are limited studies on successes versus failures in these cohorts. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with and without GBL to determine a threshold percentage of GBL that predicts success. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: All consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability between 2004 and 2013 were prospectively enrolled. Patients with ≤25% GBL were included. Patients with no GBL were grouped and compared with those having 5% to 25% GBL. Outcomes included Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation, Western Ontario Shoulder Index, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, with evidence of recurrent instability. Patients with and without GBL were statistically compared with respect to outcomes and recurrence rates. Results: Of 434 eligible patients, the cases of 405 (45 female, 360 male; mean age, 27.5 years [range, 18-47 years]) were followed for a mean 61 months (range, 48-96 months). There were 189 (46.6%) with no GBL and 216 (53.3%) with GBL; the mean GBL of the latter cohort was 15% (range, 5%-25%). The mean duration of instability symptoms was 7.9 months (range, 1-21 months) and was significantly longer in the GBL group ( P < .05). The mean recurrence rate was 14.8%, which was significantly greater in patients presenting with GBL versus those with none (48/216 [22.2%] vs 12/189 [6.3%]; P < .01). Within the GBL group, GBL ≥15%, duration of symptoms >5 months, and younger age (4-times greater odds of recurrence after arthroscopic stabilization (odds ratio, 4.21; 95% CI, 2.16-8.21). Moreover, patients presenting for arthroscopic Bankart repair with GBL ≥15% had nearly 3-times greater odds of recurrent instability. Conclusion: GBL ≥15% in an active patient population portends to increased odds of recurrent instability events and inferior clinical outcomes after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Furthermore, nonmodifiable risk factors, such as age (5 months), significantly affect risk of recurrence and should be key factors when counseling patients on risk of failure and determining the ideal procedure for the individual patient.

International audience; Purpose: This work compares the biomechanical resistance of five modes of fixation coracoid bone-block fixation during Latarjet open-air or arthroscopic procedures. The hypothesis is that these systems are equivalent.Methods: Latarjet procedures were performed on cadavers, then the samples were subjected to an increasing tension until the fixation failed. Five systems were tested: two malleolar screws, one screw with washer, two 3.5-mm self-compressive screws, one 4-mm self-compressive screw associated with one 3-mm self-compressive screw, and endobutton. The main judgment criterion was the strength necessary for the failure of the fixation. The secondary criterion was the stiffness of the assembly.Results: The single malleolar screw fixing has a lower breaking threshold than other fixings. There is no difference in strength concerning the other systems. The average strength is greater than the stresses of a shoulder during daily life activities. There is no difference regarding the secondary criterion.Conclusion: The use of a single screw is insufficient, but the other systems seems reliable. The use of small diameter self-compressive cannulated screws can provide a better result. This biomechanical work must be validated in clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: In-season return to play after anterior glenohumeral instability is associated with high rates of recurrent instability and the need for surgical stabilization. We are not aware of previous studies that have investigated in-season return to play after posterior glenohumeral instability; furthermore, as posterior shoulder instability in collision athletes occurs frequently, understanding the expected outcome of in-season athletes may improve the ability of physicians to provide athletes with a better understanding of the expected outcome of their injury and their ability to return to sport. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What proportion of athletes returned to play during the season after posterior instability in collegiate football players? (2) How much time did athletes lose to injury, what proportion of athletes opted to undergo surgery, and what proportion of athletes experienced recurrent instability after a posterior instability episode during a collegiate football season? METHODS: A multicenter, prospective, observational study of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division 1 Football Bowl Subdivision athletes was performed at three US Military Service Academies. Ten athletes who sustained a posterior instability event during the regular football season and who pursued a course of nonoperative treatment were identified and prospectively observed through the subsequent season. All athletes in the observed cohort attempted an initial course of nonoperative treatment during the season. All athletes sustained subluxation events initially identified through history and physical examination at the time of injury. None of the athletes sustained a dislocation event requiring a manual reduction. Intraarticular pathology consisting of posterior labral pathology was further subsequently identified in all subjects via MRI arthrogram. Return to play was the primary outcome of interest. Time lost to injury, surgical intervention, and subsequent instability were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 10 athletes who opted for a trial of initial nonoperative management, seven athletes were able to return to play during the same season. Although these seven athletes returned within 1 week of their injury (median of 1 day), 5 of 7 athletes sustained recurrent subluxation events with a median (range) of four subluxation events per athlete (0 to 8) during the remainder of the season. Seven athletes were treated surgically after the completion of their season, four of whom returned to football. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that although collegiate football players are able to return to in-season sport after a posterior glenohumeral instability event, they will likely sustain multiple recurrent instability events and undergo surgery after the season is completed. The results of this study can help guide in-season management of posterior shoulder instability by allowing more appropriate postinjury counseling and decision making through the identification of those athletes who may require additional attention from medical staff during the season and possible modifications to training regimens to minimize long-term disability. Further prospective studies involving a larger cohort over several seasons should be performed through collaborative studies across the NCAA that better assess function and injury risk factors before beginning collegiate athletics. This would better characterize the natural history and associated functional limitations that athletes may encounter during their collegiate careers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study.

Posterior glenohumeral instability in overhead athletes presents a unique set of challenges for both diagnosis and treatment. Although a great deal of attention has been focused on the management of injuries to the biceps-labrum complex and rotator cuff in throwers, comparatively less has been written about posterior glenohumeral instability within this unique cohort. Historically, posterior instability has been observed secondary to either acute trauma or repetitive microtrauma, usually among collision athletes, weight lifters, and rowers. However, posterior glenohumeral instability resulting from pathology of the posterior capsulolabral tissues in throwers is a different entity, and the clinical assessment begins with an accurate differentiation between adaptive capsular laxity and labral injury with pathologic instability. Some posterior capsule labrum tears confirmed on arthroscopy will require nothing more than debridement. However, for more extensive lesions, surgical treatment must balance the necessity to repair torn capsulolabral tissues with the tendency to over constrain the shoulder. The literature provides mixed results regarding the likelihood of overhead athletes with posterior glenohumeral instability and labral injury treated surgically returning to their preinjury level of sport performance.

Context:Bone loss is a major factor in determining surgical choice in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability. Although bone loss has been described, there is no consensus on glenoid, humeral head, and bipolar bone loss limits for which arthroscopic-only management with Bankart repair can be performed.Objective:To provide guidelines for selecting a more complex repair or reconstruction (in lieu of arthroscopic-only Bankart repair) in the setting of glenohumeral instability based on available literature.Data Sources:An electronic search of the literature for the period from 2000 to 2019 was performed using PubMed (MEDLINE).Study Selection:Studies were included if they quantified bone loss (humeral head or glenoid) in the setting of anterior instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair.Study Design:Systematic review.Level of Evidence:Level 4.Data Extraction:Study design, level of evidence, patient demographics, follow-up, recurrence rates, and measures of bone loss (glenoid, humeral head, bipolar).Results:A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 10 measured glenoid bone loss, 5 measured humeral head bone loss, and 2 measured “tracking” without explicit measurement of humeral head bone loss. Measurement techniques for glenoid and humeral head bone loss varied widely. Recommendations for maximum glenoid bone loss for arthroscopic repair were largely Conclusion:It is essential that a standardized method of glenoid and humeral head bone loss measurements be performed preoperatively to assess which patients will have successful stabilization after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Glenoid bone loss should be

Humeral head defects (Hill-Sachs lesions) are common sequelae of glenohumeral instability and potentiate recurrence. Engaging Hill-Sachs lesions clearly increase risk of recurrent instability when not addressed surgically. Arthroscopic remplissage, in conjunction with Bankart repair, has proven to be a safe and effective means to treat anterior gelnohumeral instability. Remplissage, when executed properly, favorably alters the “glenoid track” and thus lessens the risk of glenohumeral engagement in abduction external rotation. Remplissage is a biologic tissue transfer that confers much less morbidity than glenoid bone grafting procedures (Latarjet), while demonstrating comparable efficacy.

The accurate identification and quantification of both glenoid bone loss and the presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion is essential in the setting of anterior shoulder instability as it directly dictates patient outcomes. The ability to diagnose and address these potential osseous defects of the glenohumeral joint based on patient history, physical exam, and the findings of various imaging modalities in a clinical setting is fundamental to the overall success of a surgeon's treatment algorithm. Multiple methods exist to quantify bone loss based on diagnostic imaging or arthroscopy, and the surgeon should be mindful of the respective pearls and pitfalls of each imaging modality and their ability to accurately diagnose shoulder bone loss. Pertinent findings in a patient's history such as age, level of activity, enlistment status, and events of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability can help one not only predict the presence of bone loss, but the location and size of the defect as well. Furthermore, symptoms and signs of chronic instability along with accurate quantification of glenoid bone loss are essential in the algorithm of selecting the correct surgical procedure to provide optimal stabilization and maximize clinical outcomes.

Arthroscopic shoulder stabilization is the most commonly used technique to treat shoulder instability; however, recurrence rates have been shown to be high in our literature. Optimizing treating of glenohumeral instability is crucial to improve patient outcomes. This chapter will provide a basic review of the key steps in the evaluation and management of patients with shoulder instability with minimal bone loss.

The glenohumeral joint (GHJ) allows for a wide range of motion, but is also particularly vulnerable to episodes of instability. Anterior GHJ instability is especially frequent among young, athletic populations during contact sporting events. Many first time dislocators can be managed non-operatively with a period of immobilization and rehabilitation, however certain patient populations are at higher risk for recurrent instability and may require surgical intervention for adequate stabilization. Determination of the optimal treatment strategy should be made on a case-by-case basis while weighing both patient specific factors and injury patterns (i.e., bone loss). The purpose of this review is to describe the relevant anatomical stabilizers of the GHJ, risk factors for recurrent instability including bony lesions, indications for arthroscopic vs open surgical management, clinical history and physical examination techniques, imaging modalities, and pearls/pitfalls of arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior glenohumeral instability.