Arthroscopic Joint Preservation in Severe Glenohumeral Arthritis Using Interpositional Human Dermal Allograft

Humeral Head Morphology Influences Outcomes of Arthroscopic Interposition Glenoid Patch Allograft for Glenohumeral Arthritis

Purpose

To determine short- to midterm patient-reported outcomes of arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty using acellular dermal allograft with a minimum follow-up of 1 year and to assess outcomes in patients with and without flattening of the humeral head.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of primary glenohumeral arthritis who underwent arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal allograft from July 2010 to November 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria were a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral arthritis and Outerbridge 4 full-thickness cartilage loss of ≥50% of the glenoid articular surface. Patients underwent arthroscopic debridement, microfracture, and biological arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal matrix. Postoperative outcomes included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, analgesic use, and conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Results were stratified according to humeral head morphology on preoperative radiographs.

Results

A total of 25 patients were included, with a mean age of 56.0 years (range 19.2 to 74.8) and a mean follow-up of 3.36 years (range 1.03 to 8.98). The mean postoperative ASES score was 64.1 (range 11.7 to 100.0), SANE score was 62% (range 5% to 100%), and PSS was 61.2 (range 10.6 to 97.9). Additionally, 56% of patients rated their shoulder function as improved or much improved, and 36% of patients converted to TSA at a mean of 2.35 years. Patients with and without humeral flattening had similar postoperative ASES scores (P = .44), SANE scores (P = .90), PSS (P = .73), and conversions to TSA (P = .83). Patients with humeral flattening were more likely to have shoulder pain at night (83.3% versus 28.6%, P = .02).

Conclusion

Arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal allograft resulted in satisfactory short- to mid-term postoperative outcomes for younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis but demonstrated a TSA conversion rate of 36%. Patients with humeral head flattening also had satisfactory shoulder function but were more likely to experience shoulder pain at night.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case series

Patch Augmentation in Rotator Cuff Repair

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Rotator cuff repair has excellent outcomes for many patients but continues to be suboptimal for large, retracted tears, and revision procedures. In these situations, patch augmentation may be considered in order to improve healing. The purpose of this article is to review the history, graft options, indications, surgical technique, outcomes, and complications associated with arthroscopic patch augmentation for rotator cuff repair.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patch augmentation has been shown in several studies to improve healing rates. After multiple investigations into different materials available for patch augmentation, acellular dermal allograft seems to be the graft with the best scientific support. While multiple techniques have been presented, few studies have compared their performance. While the arthroscopic technique for patch augmentation can be challenging, we present a systematic approach to this procedure with the potential to reliably and predictably perform patch augmentation. This technique is a valuable tool for surgeons that treat rotator cuff pathology.

[Options in joint-preserving surgical treatment of osteoarthritis]

BACKGROUND

The treatment of glenohumeral arthritis represents a major challenge in highly active younger patients. In these patients, an endoprosthetic treatment often achieves only unsatisfactory results with a limited lifetime of the implant.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to identify joint-preserving therapies for glenohumeral arthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

For this study, an extensive and selective literature search was performed.

RESULTS

There are several options available for joint-preserving treatment of glenohumeral arthritis. In addition to arthroscopic debridement with treatment of concomitant pathologies, CAM procedures (CAM: comprehensive arthroscopic management) according to Millett, as well as the interposition of allografts are other options. For all therapy options, an improved range of motion and pain reduction is described. A joint gap of <2 mm, bipolar cartilage lesions and age are described as risk factors for failure of the therapies.

DISCUSSION

Short and mid-term results have been described for arthroscopic debridement, but there are no long-term and high-quality studies to enable us to make clear recommendations. The CAM procedure and the interposition of an allograft are demanding procedures that should be reserved for experienced arthroscopists. The therapies are an option for younger patients in accordance with individual decisions and realistic expectations.