Long-term prevalence and impact of glenohumeral osteoarthritis after Latarjet-Patte procedure for anterior instability

The Biomechanical Importance of Bone Block Positioning in Glenoid Augmentation: Every Millimeter Matters

BACKGROUND

In the presence of anterior glenoid bone loss (aGBL), options for bony glenoid augmentation include Latarjet procedures and free bone block transfers. Bone graft placement is challenging, and malposition causes complications, such as recurrent instability or osteoarthritis.

HYPOTHESIS

With minimal changes in bone block positioning, osteochondral shoulder stability cannot be restored sufficiently.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

In a robotic test setup, 14 human cadaveric scapulae were included. Soft tissue was resected, and matching artificial humeri were selected for each specimen. Testing was performed in 60° of glenohumeral abduction with 50 N of glenohumeral compression and anterior-directed translational force to the humerus. Application of 20% aGBL and screw fixation of artificial bone blocks (artBBs) with different buildup shells allowed the following testing stages: (1) intact, (2) 20% aGBL, (3) flush artBB, (4) 1-mm medialized artBB, and (5) 1-mm lateralized artBB. The stability ratio (SR) and medial-lateral humeral head starting position were assessed.

RESULTS

Specimens with 20% aGBL provided lower mean SRs than native joints (20.6% [SD, 4.7%] vs 27.8% [SD, 6.7%]; P < .0001). Flush artBB placement (mean, 35.4%; SD, 7.7%) led to an increased SR compared with both native joints (P = .002) and 20% aGBL (P < .0001). The mean SR in 1-mm medialized artBBs (21.5%; SD, 5.7%) did not differ compared with that for 20% aGBL (P = .908). One-millimeter lateralized artBBs (mean, 40.8%; SD, 5%) provided higher SR and more lateral humeral head starting positions compared with flush artBB (P = .003 and P = .003, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In the presence of aGBL, flush bone block placement restores osteochondral glenohumeral stability, while a 1-mm medialized bone block fails to increase stability. Bone block lateralization of 1 mm provides higher stability but is associated with humeral head lateralization.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Glenoid bone block augmentations are established in patients with glenohumeral instability and aGBL. In the case of bone block malposition, complications like recurrent instability or the development of osteoarthritis can occur. This study underlines the importance of accurate bone block placement since only minimum bone block malposition relevantly affects osteochondral shoulder biomechanics.

Open Latarjet Results in Lower Recurrent Instability and Revision Rates Than Arthroscopic Bankart Repair at a 10-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To compare arthroscopic Bankart repair versus the open Latarjet procedure at a minimum of a 10-year follow-up evaluating recurrence and arthropathy development rates.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in concordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Recurrent instability, revisions, and instability arthropathy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 40 studies met our criteria and were included, with 2,019 shoulders undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 1,069 undergoing the open Latarjet procedure. The rate of recurrent instability was 0.0% to 22.6% (redislocations: 0.0%-9.6%) in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 13.3% to 82.2% (redislocations: 9.6%-25.7%) among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of total revisions was 0.0% to 17.9% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 4.8% to 42.9% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of overall arthritis was 10.3% to 71.4% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 16.7% to 89.3% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a lower recurrent instability rate and revision rate in the open Latarjet group compared to the arthroscopic Bankart group at long-term follow-up. The rates of moderate to severe arthritis were comparable between the 2 procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.

Editorial Commentary: Both Bristow and Latarjet Procedures Result in Low Rates of Recurrent Shoulder Instability Despite Potential for Bone Resorption and Lack of Graft Healing

Anterior shoulder instability surgery has evolved over the decades, including both anatomic and nonanatomic repairs and reconstructions. Surgeons are continually advancing their skills and performing more of these procedures using arthroscopic as opposed to open techniques in patients with and without glenoid bone loss. However, there is a steep learning curve and increased technical demands when performing these procedures arthroscopically. Despite high success rates, bone graft resorption or lack of healing after Latarjet and Bristow procedures is well documented, and it is possible that patients develop enough scarring that their shoulders remain stable. Osteoarthritis after these nonanatomic procedures can occur making shoulder arthroplasty and reconstruction technically more challenging because of scarring and the altered anatomy. It remains to be seen whether these arthroscopic techniques as opposed to open surgery lessen the scarring and thus the technical demands of shoulder reconstruction in the small subset of patients who unfortunately develop symptomatic shoulder osteoarthritis. Therefore, in my practice, these techniques are carefully chosen for select patients. My indications for use of the Bristow procedure as a primary procedure for anterior shoulder instability are in patients who perform mixed martial arts fighting and high-level wrestlers without significant glenoid or humeral bone loss. My indications for the Latarjet procedure are in patients with chronic anterior instability and associated anterior glenoid bone loss 15% to 30%, off-track Hill-Sachs lesions, and revision surgery, particularly in high-demand contact and collision athletes. These 2 arthroscopic procedures, despite being nonanatomic, provide surgeons with excellent treatment options for those difficult patients with anterior shoulder instability. Despite high success rates with these arthroscopic procedures, patients should be counseled on the risks of graft resorption, graft nonunion, and possible shoulder osteoarthritis. The appropriate indications for these arthroscopic procedures can enhance the successful outcomes for high-risk patients with shoulder instability while also considering the possible long-term impacts of altering shoulder anatomy and scarring in the rare patient who develops shoulder osteoarthritis.

The Arthroscopic Bristow Procedure Is Superior to the Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure in Return to Sports but Inferior in Graft Healing: A Comparative Study With 3.4-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare clinical and computed tomography outcomes between the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and the arthroscopic Bristow procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Latarjet or Bristow procedures with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-eight shoulders were included in the Latarjet group, and 34 were included in the Bristow group. Recurrence of dislocation, clinical scores, rate of return to sports (RTS), and computed tomography assessment findings (position of transferred coracoid, graft healing, graft absorption, and glenohumeral degenerative osteoarthritis [OA]) were obtained at final follow-up.

RESULTS

No recurrent dislocation occurred in either group, and no significant differences in clinical scores were found between the 2 procedures, with a mean follow-up period of 3.4 years. The operative time in the Bristow group was significantly shorter than that in the Latarjet group (P < .001). The transferred coracoid had healed in 94.7% of the patients in the Latarjet group and 85.3% in the Bristow group at final follow-up (P = .01). No significant difference in graft absorption or the degree of glenohumeral OA was detected between the 2 groups. However, moderate to severe OA only occurred in the Latarjet group at final follow-up (4 of 38 shoulders, 10.5%). The postoperative external rotation angle and level of RTS favored the Latarjet procedure (P = .030 and P = .034, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic Bristow procedures led to good clinical scores with no new dislocation episodes. The Bristow group showed significantly less graft healing than the Latarjet group. However, the arthroscopic Bristow procedure took less operative time and showed a lower rate of early moderate to severe glenohumeral OA, better range of motion, and a higher rate of RTS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.