Outcomes of two surgical revision techniques for recurrent anterior shoulder instability following selective capsular repair

Clinical outcomes, return to sport, and complications after isolated primary Latarjet versus Latarjet as a revision procedure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this review was to compare clinical outcomes, return to sport (RTS), and complications in comparative studies examining patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedure versus Latarjet in the revision setting following soft tissue stabilization.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I to III human clinical studies reporting clinical outcomes (Visual Analogue Pain Scale [VAS]), RTS metrics, and complications in patients following primary versus revision Latarjet procedures. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies, consisting of 1170 patients (n=1179 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.4 years, consisting of 91.9% males (n=1083/1179 shoulders), were identified. Mean final follow-up was 46.4 (mean range, 7.3-72.2) months. A total of 748 primary and 431 revision Latarjet procedures were analyzed. Complications were reported in 9.6% (range, 0%-24.2%) of patients undergoing primary and 20.2% (range, 0%-40.7%) in patients undergoing revision procedures (p=0.22). There was no significant difference in the RTS rate between patients undergoing primary (87.3%; range, 83.8%-92.1%) versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (78.9%; range, 60%-100%) (p=0.08). Moreover, no significant difference in postoperative VAS was observed in patients undergoing primary versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (p=0.21). Recurrent shoulder subluxation was significantly greater in patients undergoing revision (12.0%; n=31/259 shoulders; range, 0%-20.7%) compared to primary procedures (3.3%; n=27/511 shoulders; range, 0%-9%) (p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet demonstrated overall similar rates of complications and return to sport. Of clinical importance, Latarjet as a revision procedure possessed a risk of recurrent subluxation 3.6 times higher than primary Latarjet. While effective, patients should be counseled regarding the differing prognosis between Latarjet as a primary or revision procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; Systematic review and meta-analysis.

A comprehensive comparison and evaluation of surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder instability is a common clinical problem; however, conflicting evidence exists regarding optimal treatment algorithms. We perform a comparative analysis of stabilization techniques used for recurrent anterior shoulder instability to identify the one associated with the lowest rate of recurrent instability. We additionally explore how glenoid bone loss and osseus lesions affect recurrence rates.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for clinical studies comparing surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability. Two team members independently assessed all potential studies for eligibility and extracted data. Each included study underwent a risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias summary tool. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of recurrent instability, which underwent a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Additional analyses were performed relating to the degree of glenoid bone loss and the presence of osseous lesions.

RESULTS

Of 2699 studies screened, 52 studies with 4209 patients were included. Patients who underwent open Latarjet demonstrated the overall lowest rate of recurrent instability [log odds ratio (LOR) 1.93], whereas patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair demonstrated the highest (LOR 2.87). When glenoid bone loss was 10% to 20%, open Latarjet had significantly lower recurrent instability (P = .0016) compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. When glenoid bone loss increased from 0%-10% to 10%-20%, arthroscopic Bankart repair had a significantly increased rate of recurrence (P = .021). In the presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion, both open Latarjet (P = .01) and arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (P = .029) had significantly reduced recurrence rates compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. Finally, regardless of procedure, the presence of a Hill-Sachs or bony Bankart lesion was associated with an increased risk of recurrent instability (r = 0.44, P = .0003, and r = 0.40, P = .006, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The open Latarjet has the overall lowest recurrent instability and significantly lower compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair in the setting of increasing glenoid bone loss. Bone loss between 0% and 10% results in similar outcomes across all procedures.

Bankart repair with remplissage vs. Latarjet procedure on recurrence, postoperative pain scores, external rotation, and Rowe score in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion. A systematic review

Background

Currently, recurrent anterior shoulder instability in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion managed using the Bankart repair showed higher recurrent instability compared with the Latarjet technique. Addition of posterior capsulodesis with infraspinatus remplissage to the Bankart repair, known as Bankart with remplissage (BR), increases shoulder stability in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion. BR can potentially match the low recurrence rates of the Latarjet procedure while being less invasive. This systematic review compares the Bankart repair with remplissage and Latarjet procedure on postoperative pain, external rotation range of motion, and recurrent instability in anterior shoulder instability patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion.

Methods

A systematic search of the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases was performed. Studies comparing BR and Latarjet on recurrent instability and/or visual analogue scale (VAS) pain score in anterior shoulder instability patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion were included. Expert opinion, conference presentations, editorials, abstracts, case reports, and nonclinical studies were excluded. Records were initially screened by title and abstract, during the second screening full text was consulted. Study quality was examined using the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria. Risk ratios were calculated for recurrent instability, and standardized mean difference (Cohen's d) were calculated for VAS pain, external rotation, and Rowe score.

Results

Eight of the 146 studies were included in the analysis. The study population consisted of a total of 845 patients, of whom 450 patients underwent the Latarjet procedure and 395 patients underwent BR. Three studies included revision surgery patients; more revision surgery patients were allocated to the Latarjet group. Risk ratios for recurrent instability varied from 0.45 to 2.41. Effect size varied for VAS pain from -2.28 to 0.04, for external rotation from -1.44 to 1.12, and for Rowe score from -0.67 to 1.37. Limitations of the included studies were differences in baseline demographics and functional outcomes.

Conclusion

Recurrent instability seems equal between BR and Latarjet in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion depth <10 mm. Latarjet showed superior external rotation than BR. Future research should examine patient demographics optimal for minimizing recurrent instability using BR.

Bony reconstruction after failed labral repair is associated with higher recurrence rates compared to primary bony reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1319 shoulders in studies with a minimum of 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty with regard to the optimal revision procedure after failed labral repair for anterior shoulder instability. An overview of outcomes of these procedures with quantitative analysis is not available in literature. The aim of this review is (1) to compare recurrence rates after revision labral repair (RLR) and revision bony reconstruction (RBR), both following failed labral repair. In addition, (2) recurrence rates after RBR following failed labral repair and primary bony reconstruction (PBR) are compared to determine if a previous failed labral repair influences the outcomes of the bony reconstruction.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years and reporting recurrence rates of (1) RBR following failed labral repair and PBR and/or (2) RLR following failed labral repair and RBR following failed labral repair were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised 1319 shoulders. Meta-analyses showed that RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR (risk ratio [RR] 0.51, P < .008) but found no significant difference in the recurrence rates for RLR and RBR (RR 1.40, P < .49). Also, no significant differences were found between PBR and RBR in return to sport (RR 1.07, P < .41), revision surgery (RR 0.8, P < .44), and complications (RR 0.84, P < .53). Lastly, no significant differences between RLR and RBR for revision surgery (RR 3.33, P < .19) were found.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analyses show that (1) RBR does not demonstrate a significant difference in recurrence rates compared with RLR and that (2) RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR.

Intra-articular Versus Extra-articular Coracoid Grafts: A Systematic Review of Capsular Repair Techniques During the Latarjet Procedure

Background:

Various methods exist for managing the joint capsule during the Latarjet procedure. Repairing the capsule to the native glenoid rim results in an extra-articular bone block, while repairing it to the remnant coracoacromial ligament stump of the coracoid graft renders it intra-articular. The technique that optimizes patient outcomes is not well defined.

Purpose:

To compare the outcomes of intra-articular and extra-articular bone block techniques for the Latarjet procedure.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

Using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we queried the PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for all studies reporting outcomes of the Latarjet procedure with a clearly defined method of capsular repair that rendered the coracoid graft intra-articular or extra-articular. The included levels of evidence and degree of heterogeneity in this study precluded meta-analysis. Outcomes of interest included preoperative variables, surgical technique, rehabilitation protocols, functional outcome assessments, recurrent instability, range of motion, and radiographic findings.

Results:

A total of 16 studies including 816 patients were included. A total of 8 studies employed an intra-articular bone block in 338 patients, while the other 8 employed an extra-articular technique in 478 patients. There was variation among studies in reference to baseline patient characteristics, surgical techniques, rehabilitation, methods for assessing patient outcomes, and follow-up times. Rates of postoperative instability were reported in 8 intra-articular (0%, 0%, 2.1%, 2.7%, 3.2%, 5%, 5.4%, 5.9%) and 7 extra-articular (0%, 0%, 1.2%, 2%, 3.9%, 6.3%, 14%) bone block studies. Postoperative osteoarthritis or progression of preoperative osteoarthritis was reported in 5 intra-articular bone block studies (0%, 5.6%, 23.5%, 23.5%, 25%) and 4 extra-articular bone block studies (0%, 1.9%, 5.2%, 8.6%).

Conclusion:

Varying capsular repair methods appeared to provide similar outcomes regarding stability. There was an apparent trend toward higher rates of post-traumatic arthritis among studies in which an intra-articular bone block technique was employed; however, it is possible that this was influenced by substantially different follow-up times between groups and other various sources of heterogeneity among the included studies. There were no studies in the literature directly comparing intra-articular and extra-articular bone block techniques. Large-scale randomized controlled trials or comparative studies are needed to draw stronger conclusions comparing the 2 techniques.

The Bristow-Latarjet procedure for revision of failed arthroscopic Bankart: a retrospective case series of 59 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of anterior instability after arthroscopic Bankart prevents return to sports and remains a surgical challenge. We aim to assess clinical and radiologic outcomes after coracoid bone-block performed either open or under arthroscopy, for the management of failed arthroscopic Bankart PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive patients with anterior instability recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart were revised with a Bristow or Latarjet procedure performed either open (25 cases) or under arthroscopy (34 cases). Patients were reviewed for clinical and radiologic examination at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Glenohumeral bony lesions were evaluated preoperatively with computed tomographic scans. Postoperative bone-block position, union, and postinstability arthritis were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 89 months (24-193). The epidemiologic analysis showed that patients with failed arthroscopic Bankart were young (age <23 years), 58 (98%) were practicing sports, with contact/forced overhead sports (53%), often in competition (53%), had hyperlaxity (71%), and for the most part of them glenohumeral bone loss (88%). Their mean preoperative Instability Severity Index Score was 5.4 ± 2.2 points. After revision with Bristow-Latarjet procedure, 53 patients (91%) returned to sports, 37 (70%) to their previous sports activity, and 17 (46%) to their previous level. No patient suffered recurrent dislocation. Four patients (7%) had recurrent subluxations, all after open procedure; 8 patients (14.5%) had persistent anterior apprehension. A large and deep Hill-Sachs lesion was a risk factor for persistent anterior apprehension (P = .002) and lower level when returned to sports (P = .04). Ninety-two percent of bone-blocks were positioned flush with the glenoid anterior rim, with 84% of bone union. At last follow-up, 5% of patients had severe postinstability osteoarthritis (Samilson 4).

CONCLUSION

The Bristow-Latarjet, performed either open or under arthroscopy, is an efficient procedure to restore shoulder stability and allow returning to sports in patients with failed arthroscopic Bankart and glenoid bone loss. Patients with a large and deep Hill-Sachs lesion had more persistent anterior apprehension and a lower sports level.

Return to sport following Latarjet glenoid reconstruction for anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

Latarjet coracoid transfer reconstruction is the gold standard for the treatment of recurrent shoulder instability with anterior-inferior glenoid bone loss, and return to sport is often a primary outcome of interest in this patient population. The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of return to sport in patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure and variables that are associated with a higher likelihood of a successful return to sport.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained institutional registry was retrospectively queried between August 2012 and August 2016 for all patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure. Patients were contacted electronically and via telephone to administer a previously validated and standardized return-to-sport survey. Patients self-reported return to sport, varying sports participation, recurrence of instability, and time to return to sport. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine variables associated with each outcome.

RESULTS

Of 83 patients, 66 (75.3%) were available for final follow-up, of whom 60 participated in sports prior to surgery and were eligible for inclusion. The average follow-up period was 53.8 ± 11.8 months. The average age at surgery was 26.7 ± 11.3 years, and the average body mass index was 26.2 ± 4.0 kg/m². There were 54 patients (90%) who were able to return to sport at an average of 8.6 ± 4.1 months following surgery. In total, 36 patients (60%) were able to return to sport at the same level or a better level of intensity, 19 of 28 patients (67.9%) were able to return to throwing sports without difficulty, and 31 of 60 patients (51.7%) reported that their shoulder was a hindrance to some activity. An increased likelihood of returning to sport was associated with increased body mass index (P = .016), male sex (P = .028), and decreased humeral bone loss volume (P = .034). An increased likelihood of returning to sport at the same level or a better level of intensity was associated with reduced humeral bone loss volume (P = .026). Recurrent instability was associated with humeral bone loss (P = .038).

CONCLUSION

Although a large majority of patients were able to return to sport following the Latarjet procedure, some patients experienced limitation with throwing and return to sport at the preinjury level. Greater humeral bone loss was associated with inferior outcomes. These findings should be discussed with patients in the preoperative setting to manage expectations appropriately.

Low rate of recurrent instability following the open Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for failed prior stabilization surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to ascertain functional outcomes, recurrence rates and subsequent revision rates following the open Latarjet procedure when performed as a revision procedure.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Studies where the Latarjet procedure was performed as a revision procedure were included. Clinical outcomes analyzed were: (1) functional outcomes, (2) recurrent instability, (3) revisions, and (4) complications.

RESULTS

The review found 16 studies with 713 shoulders that met the inclusion criteria. 605 of the patients were male (84.9%), with an average age of 28.2 years (15-62) and follow-up of 47.7 months. The most commonly reported functional outcome measure was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean of 92.7. 86/95 patients had good-excellent outcomes (90.4%). 136/143 patients reported return to play (95.1%). 141/161 patients returned to the same level of competition (87.6%). 50 patients experienced recurrence (8.4%). Five patients experienced redislocation (0.9%) and 37 patients experienced subluxation (6.7%). There were 29 revisions (5.1%), with 12 revisions due to recurrence (2.1%). There were 68 total complications, not including recurrence (11%). The most common complications were 13 cases of nerve damage and infection respectively (2.1%). There was 17 cases of new instability arthropathy (6.5%), and 31 cases of residual pain (6.7%).

CONCLUSION

This review shows that the revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low rates of recurrence and complications, and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. This results from study can be used to explain the expected outcomes associated with the Latarjet procedure performed as a revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet for Failed Primary Arthroscopic Stabilization With Subcritical Bone Loss

Background:

Limited evidence is available regarding the recommended technique of revision surgery for recurrent shoulder instability. Only 1 previous study has compared the results of soft tissue repair and the Latarjet technique in patients with persistent shoulder instability after primary surgical stabilization.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

To evaluate the results of revision surgery in patients with previous surgical stabilization failure and subcritical glenoid bone defects, comparing repeated Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet technique. The hypothesis was that Latarjet would be superior to soft tissue procedures in terms of objective and subjective functional scores, recurrence rates, and range of movement.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Included were 45 patients (mean age, 29.1 ± 8.9 years) with subcritical bone loss (<15% of articular surface) who had undergone revision anterior shoulder instability repair after failed Bankart repair. Of these, 17 patients had arthroscopic Bankart repair and 28 had arthroscopic Latarjet surgery. Patients were evaluated at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively with the Rowe score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, and Subjective Shoulder Value. Subluxation or dislocation episodes were considered failures.

Results:

No statistically significant differences were found between groups in age, sex, sporting activity, preoperative Rowe score, or the presence of hyperlaxity or bony lesions. At revision arthroscopy, 20 shoulders showed a persistent Bankart lesion, 13 a medially healed labrum, and 6 a bony Bankart. In 6 patients, no abnormalities were present that could explain postoperative recurrence. In the Bankart repair group, 7 patients underwent isolated Bankart procedures; in the remaining 10 cases, a capsular shift was added. No significant differences were found between the Bankart and Latarjet groups in outcome scores, recurrence rate (11.8% vs 17.9%, respectively), or postoperative athletic activity level. The mean loss of passive external rotation at 0° and 90° of abduction was similar between groups.

Conclusion:

Arthroscopic Latarjet did not lead to superior results compared with repeated Bankart repair in patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss and recurrent anterior shoulder instability after Bankart repair.

The Evaluation and Management of the Failed Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Primary arthroscopic Bankart repair is a common procedure that is increasing in popularity; however, failure rates can approach up to 6% to 30%. Factors commonly attributed to failure include repeat trauma, poor or incomplete surgical technique, humeral and/or glenoid bone loss, hyperlaxity, or a failure to identify and address rare pathology such as a humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament lesion. A thorough clinical and radiographic assessment may provide insight into the etiology, which can assist the clinician in making treatment recommendations. Surgical management of a failed primary arthroscopic Bankart repair without bone loss can include revision arthroscopic repair or open repair; however, in the setting of bone loss, the anterior-inferior glenoid can be reconstructed using a coracoid transfer, tricortical iliac crest, or structural allograft, whereas posterolateral humeral head bone loss (the Hill-Sachs defect) can be addressed with remplissage, structural allograft, or partial humeral head implant. In addition to the technical demands of revision stabilization surgery, patient and procedure selection to optimize outcomes can be challenging. This review will focus on the etiology, evaluation, and management of patients after a failed primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, including an evidence-based treatment algorithm.

Outcomes of the Latarjet Procedure for the Treatment of Chronic Anterior Shoulder Instability: Patients With Prior Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Primary Cases

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether results differ between a Latarjet procedure performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair and one performed as the primary operation.

PURPOSE

To compare the postoperative outcomes of the Latarjet procedure when performed as primary surgery and as revision for a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective comparative case-cohort analysis was performed for all patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Patients were separated into 2 groups depending on if the Latarjet procedure was performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair (group 1) or as the first operation (group 2). Outcome measures included recurrent instability, reoperation rates, complications, pain, Walch-Duplay scores, and Simple Shoulder Test.

RESULTS

A total of 308 patients were eligible for participation in the study; 72 (23.4%) did not answer and were considered lost to follow-up, leaving 236 patients available for analysis. Mean follow-up was 3.4 ± 0.8 years. There were 20 patients in group 1 and 216 in group 2. Despite similar rates of recurrent instability (5.0% in group 1 vs 2.3% in group 2; P = .5) and revision surgery (0% in group 1 vs 6.5% in group 2; P = .3), group 1 demonstrated significantly worse pain scores (2.56 ± 2.7 vs 1.2 ± 1.7; P = .01) and patient-reported outcomes (Walch-Duplay: 52 ± 25.1 vs 72.2 ± 25.0; P = .0007; Simple Shoulder Test: 9.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.7 ± 1.9; P = .001) when compared with those patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedures.

CONCLUSION

Functional outcome scores and postoperative pain are significantly worse in patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair when compared with patients undergoing primary Latarjet. The assumption that a failed a Bankart repair can be revised by a Latarjet with a similar result to a primary Latarjet appears to be incorrect. Surgeons should consider these findings when deciding on the optimal surgical procedure for recurrent shoulder instability.

Return to Play After the Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Traumatic anterior shoulder instability is a common clinical problem among athletic populations. The Latarjet procedure is a widely used treatment option to address shoulder instability in high-demand athletes at high risk of recurrence. However, rates and timing of full return to sports have not been systematically analyzed.

PURPOSE

To systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain the rate and timing of return to play and the availability of specific criteria for safe return to play after the Latarjet procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted based on PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on return to play after the Latarjet procedure. Statistical analysis was performed by use of SPSS.

RESULTS

Our review found 36 studies including 2134 cases meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were male (86.9%), with a mean age of 25.4 years (range, 15-59 years) and a mean follow-up of 83.5 months. The overall rate of return to play was 88.8%, with 72.6% returning to the same level of play. Among collision athletes, the overall rate of return to play was 88.2%, with 69.5% returning to the same level of play. In overhead athletes, the overall rate of return to play was 90.3%, with 80.6% returning to the same level of play. The mean time to return to play was 5.8 months (range, 3.2-8 months). Specific return to play criteria were reported in the majority of the studies (69.4%); time to return to sport was the most commonly reported item (66.7%).

CONCLUSION

The overall rate of return to play was reportedly high after the Latarjet procedure. However, almost a fifth of athletes returning to sports were not able to return at the same level. Further development of validated criteria for safe return to sports could potentially improve clinical outcomes and reduce recurrence rates.

Comparative Systematic Review of Fixation Methods of the Coracoid and Conjoined Tendon in the Anterior Glenoid to Treat Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

Coracoid process transfer for the treatment of recurrent glenohumeral dislocations is a safe and reliable procedure; however, there is no consensus as to which is the best method, the Bristow or Latarjet procedure.

PURPOSE

To analyze the results of coracoid process transfer for the treatment of recurrent glenohumeral dislocations and to compare the results of this transfer between the Bristow and Latarjet techniques.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The databases surveyed for this review included J-STAGE; Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialized Register; Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials; MEDLINE; Ovid; Embase; Google Scholar; and CINAHL. Inclusion criteria consisted of (1) studies related to anterior glenohumeral dislocations treated with transfer of the coracoid process to the anterior glenoid rim and (2) studies that could provide data to perform at least 1 meta-analysis or other statistical evaluation. Titles and abstracts were reviewed for inclusion; thereafter, outcomes and the risk of bias were extracted. Statistical analyses were performed according to the nature of the data. When possible, the 95% CI was included.

RESULTS

Of the 779 studies found, 63 were able to provide data assessing 3395 shoulders. There were no randomized, blinded, or double-blinded trials. The recurrence of dislocations was assessed in 41 studies that used the Bristow technique (n = 2346 shoulders; percentage redislocations [mean ± SE], 1.00% ± 0.20%) and 18 studies that used the Latarjet technique (n = 930 shoulders; percentage redislocations, 2.13% ± 0.49%) (P = .04). The mean loss of external rotation was 12.91° for the Bristow procedure (n = 1440 shoulders) and 11.70° for the Latarjet procedure (n = 243 shoulders). The mean quality-of-life outcome scores were as follows for the Bristow and Latarjet procedures, respectively: Rowe score, 92.06 and 89.33; Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, 16.44% and 19.68%; Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, 93.28 and 92.00; and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, 91.00 and 89.90.

CONCLUSION

Transferring the coracoid to the anteroinferior border of the glenoid through the subscapularis tendon is effective, regardless of the technique. When comparing the Bristow and Latarjet techniques, the recurrence of dislocations was the only outcome that could undergo a meta-analysis, and it presented a statistically significant difference in favor of the Bristow procedure. All other outcomes presented no clinically significant differences between their effect sizes. More studies presenting better methodology are still needed to achieve more robust conclusions.

Neural Correlates of Clinical Scores in Patients with Anterior Shoulder Apprehension

INTRODUCTION

Anterior shoulder apprehension is a commonly reported complaint in anterior shoulder instability, which may lead to patient morbidity and impede shoulder function. It is the result of a cognitively complex mechanism, which includes anxiety, salience, fear, and anticipation.

PURPOSE

The aim of this prospective case-control study was to correlate five clinically established scores using functional magnetic resonance imaging to assess brain activation patterns in patients with apprehension related to anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

This study includes 28 consecutive male right-handed patients (mean ± SEM, 26.8 ± 1.2 yr) with positive shoulder apprehension test and 10 healthy matched control participants without apprehension or a history of instability. Task-related and functional connectivity functional magnetic resonance imaging activation patterns occurring during apprehension video cue stimulation were correlated with five clinical tests and scores: Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Rowe score for instability, Simple Shoulder Test, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI).

RESULTS

Rowe, pain VAS, and WOSI scores correlated with prefrontal cortex, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, dorsomedial prefrontal cortex, somatosensory area, and parieto-occipital and temporal areas (default mode network). Rowe score additionally correlated with frontal pole, anterior midcingulate cortex, and visual areas. Moreover, SSV correlated with task-related brain activity in the bilateral precentral gyrus, bilateral postcentral gyrus, and bilateral superior parietal lobe.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, Rowe score provides the strongest link between shoulder apprehension and brain level alterations as it correlates with the highest number of independent components involving areas responsible for both motor and cognitive functions, whereas pain VAS and WOSI occupy an intermediately strong link recruiting less brain networks. Finally, Simple Shoulder Test and SSV have the weakest link at the brain level.

Outpatient Latarjet surgery for gleno-humeral instability: Prospective comparative assessment of feasibility and safety

BACKGROUND

Some surgical procedures are rarely done on an outpatient basis. The primary objective of this study was to assess the safety of outpatient surgical shoulder stabilisation using the Latarjet procedure.

HYPOTHESIS

The Latarjet procedure is safe when performed on an outpatient basis provided the patients are managed according to a specifically designed programme starting at the decision to undergo surgery and ending at the end of the early postoperative period.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with unidirectional anterior shoulder instability managed in 2013-2014 by primary open, minimally invasive surgery involving coracoid process transfer as described by Latarjet was included prospectively. One of the surgeons routinely offered outpatient surgery to patients who met none of the usual exclusion criteria (age>60years, ASA 3-4, and long distance from home to hospital). Standardised protocols were applied for anaesthesia and analgesia. The primary evaluation criterion was failure of the admission modality, defined as inpatient admission of a patient after outpatient surgery either without prior discharge or within 1week after discharge. Secondary evaluation criteria were early postoperative symptoms and functional outcomes after at least 1year. All self-reported criteria were entered online by the patients.

RESULTS

Of 46 included patients, 17 had outpatient surgery and 29 inpatient surgery. There were 41 males and 5 females, with a mean age of 25.3±6.4years. No significant baseline differences were found between the two groups. None of the outpatients required inpatient admission or readmission. No postoperative complications were recorded. After a mean follow-up of 18.5±5.2months, the two groups showed no significant differences for return to sports, apprehension, avoidance behaviours, or functional outcomes. Most patients were satisfied with their management and outcomes.

CONCLUSION

No serious adverse events were recorded in this first French prospective evaluation of the safety of open, minimally invasive shoulder stabilisation by the Latarjet procedure performed on an outpatient basis. Thus, in selected patients, the risks of outpatient surgery are similar to those of inpatient surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, prospective, comparative, non-randomised study.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes following two procedures for recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder: Latarjet procedure vs. Bankart repair

BACKGROUND

The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both viable surgical options for recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder joint. The anatomic repair is the more popular option, with 90% of surgeons internationally choosing the Bankart repair as the initial treatment. There has been no previous review directly comparing the 2 techniques. Hence, we aimed to systematically review studies to compare the outcomes of Bankart repairs vs. the Latarjet procedure for recurrent instability of the shoulder.

METHODS

Six electronic databases were searched for original, English-language studies comparing the Bankart and Latarjet procedures. Studies were critically appraised using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Data were extracted from the text, tables, and figures of the selected studies.

RESULTS

Eight comparative studies were identified with 795 shoulders; 416 of them underwent open or arthroscopic Bankart repairs, and 379 were repaired by the open Latarjet procedure. Primary and revision procedures were studied. The Latarjet procedure conferred significantly lower risk of recurrence and redislocation. There was no significant difference in the rates of complication requiring reoperation between the two procedures. Rowe scores were higher and loss of external rotation lower in the Latarjet group compared with the Bankart repair group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our studies demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure is a viable and possibly superior alternative to the Bankart repair, offering greater stability with no significant increase in complication rate. However, the studies identified were retrospective and of limited quality, and therefore randomized controlled trials with large populations of patients or prospective assessment of national orthopedic registries should be employed to confirm our findings.

Open Latarjet procedure for failed arthroscopic Bankart repair

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study assessed the functional results of open Latarjet operation for recurrence of instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair in a consecutive series of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty two patients (mean age 28.4 [range 17-62] years, 45 men) were operated on using open Latarjet operation after one (n=46) or two (n=6) failed arthroscopic Bankart repairs. The indication for revision surgery was recurrent dislocation or subluxation. Fifty patients had a Hill-Sachs lesion and 32 patients had glenoid bone lesions on plain radiographs. No attempt was made to grade the severity of bony pathology. Functional outcome and stability of 49 shoulders were assessed after an average follow-up of 38 (range 24-85) months using Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) score, Oxford shoulder instability score, and subjective shoulder value (SSV).

RESULTS

Forty-two patients had a stable shoulder at follow-up. Seven of 49 (14%) had symptoms of instability; one patient had recurrent dislocation, and six patients had subluxations. Mean WOSI, Oxford, and SSV scores were 83.9, 19.9, and 84.9, respectively. All scores were significantly better in patients who had a stable shoulder compared with those who had an unstable shoulder (WOSI 86.8 vs. 64.3; Oxford 18.2 vs. 30.8; and SSV 88.3 vs. 61.7; P<0.01). One patient needed a reoperation. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Open Latarjet operation is a good option for failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. The instability recurrence rate is acceptable and the reoperation rate was low.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Latarjet, Bristow, and Eden-Hybinette procedures for anterior shoulder dislocation: systematic review and quantitative synthesis of the literature

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcome, rate of recurrence, complications, and rate of postoperative osteoarthritis in patients with anterior shoulder instability managed with Latarjet, Bristow, or Eden-Hybinette procedures.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature on management of anterior dislocation of the shoulder with glenoid bony procedures was performed. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases using various combinations of the keywords "shoulder," "dislocation," "treatment," "Latarjet," "Bristow," "bone loss," "Eden-Hybinette," "iliac," "bone," "block," "clinical," "outcome," and "Bankart." The following data were extracted: demographics, bone defects and other lesions, type of surgery, outcome measurement, range of motion (ROM), recurrence of instability, complications, and osteoarthritis. A quantitative synthesis of all comparative studies was performed to compare bone block procedures and Bankart repair in terms of postoperative recurrence of instability and osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

Forty-six studies were included and 3,211 shoulders were evaluated. The mean value of the Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) was 65 points. Preoperatively, the injuries detected most were glenoid bone loss and Bankart lesions. The Eden-Hybinette procedure had the highest rate of postoperative osteoarthritis and recurrence. Pooled results from comparative studies showed that the bone block procedures were associated with a lower rate of recurrence when compared with Bankart repair (odds ratio [OR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28 to 0.74; P = .002), whereas there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative osteoarthritis (P = .79).

CONCLUSIONS

The open Bristow-Latarjet procedure continues to be a valid surgical option to treat patients with anterior shoulder instability. Bone block procedures were associated with a lower rate of recurrence when compared with the Bankart repair. The Eden-Hybinette procedure has clinical outcomes very similar to the Bristow-Latarjet technique but has a higher rate of postoperative osteoarthritis and recurrence. An arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet procedure seems to be better in terms of prevention of recurrence and rehabilitation, but randomized studies are needed to reach definitive conclusions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.