Outcomes of the Latarjet Procedure Versus Free Bone Block Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652092583
Author(s):  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Eric D. Haunschild ◽  
Ophelie Z. Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Tracy M. Tauro ◽  
Derrick M. Knapik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Block ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Recurrent Instability

Background: Free bone block (FBB) procedures for anterior shoulder instability have been proposed as an alternative to or bail-out for the Latarjet procedure. However, studies comparing the outcomes of these treatment modalities are limited. Purpose: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis comparing the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing anterior shoulder stabilization with a Latarjet or FBB procedure. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched from inception to 2019 for human-participants studies published in the English language. The search was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement including studies reporting clinical outcomes of patients undergoing Latarjet or FBB procedures for anterior shoulder instability with minimum 2-year follow-up. Case reports and technique articles were excluded. Data were synthesized, and a random effects meta-analysis was performed to determine the proportions of recurrent instability, other complications, progression of osteoarthritis, return to sports, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) improvement. Results: A total of 2007 studies were screened; of these, 70 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. These studies reported outcomes on a total of 4540 shoulders, of which 3917 were treated with a Latarjet procedure and 623 were treated with an FBB stabilization procedure. Weighted mean follow-up was 75.8 months (range, 24-420 months) for the Latarjet group and 92.3 months (range, 24-444 months) for the FBB group. No significant differences were found between the Latarjet and the FBB groups in the overall random pooled summary estimate of the rate of recurrent instability (5% vs 3%, respectively; P = .09), other complications (4% vs 5%, respectively; P = .892), progression of osteoarthritis (12% vs 4%, respectively; P = .077), and return to sports (73% vs 88%; respectively, P = .066). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores improved after both Latarjet and FBB, with a significantly greater increase after FBB procedures (10.44 for Latarjet vs 32.86 for FBB; P = .006). Other recorded PRO scores improved in all studies, with no significant difference between groups. Conclusion: Current evidence supports the safety and efficacy of both the Latarjet and FBB procedures for anterior shoulder stabilization in the presence of glenoid bone loss. We found no significant differences between the procedures in rates of recurrent instability, other complications, osteoarthritis progression, and return to sports. Significant improvement in PROs was demonstrated for both groups. Significant heterogeneity existed between studies on outcomes of the Latarjet and FBB procedures, warranting future high-quality, comparative studies.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of the Traditional Latarjet Versus the Congruent Arc Modification for the Treatment of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 232596712110302
Author(s):  
Sunita R.P. Mengers ◽  
Derrick M. Knapik ◽  
Matthew W. Kaufman ◽  
Gary Edwards ◽  
James E. Voos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Late Complications ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability

Background: Few studies have compared clinical outcomes between the traditional Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability and the congruent arc modification to the Latarjet procedure. Purpose: To systematically evaluate the literature for the incidence of recurrent instability, clinical outcomes, radiographic findings, and complications for the traditional Latarjet procedure and the congruent arc modification and to compare results of each search. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. We included studies published between January 1990 and October 2020 that described clinical outcomes of the traditional Latarjet and the congruent arc modification with a follow-up range of 2 to 10 years. The difference in surgical technique was analyzed using a chi-square test for categorical variables, while continuous variables were evaluated using a Student t test. Results: In total, 26 studies met the inclusion criteria: 20 studies describing the traditional Latarjet procedure in 1412 shoulders, and 6 studies describing the congruent arc modification in 289 shoulders. No difference between procedures was found regarding patient age at surgery, follow-up time, Rowe or postoperative visual analog scores, early or late complications, return-to-sport timing, or incidence of improper graft placement or graft fracture. A significantly greater proportion of male patients underwent glenoid augmentation using the congruent arc modification versus traditional Latarjet ( P < .001). When comparing outcomes, the traditional Latarjet procedure demonstrated a lower incidence of fibrous union or nonunion ( P = .047) and broken, loose, or improperly placed screws ( P < .001), and the congruent arc modification demonstrated improved outcomes with regard to overall return to sport ( P < .001), return to sport at the same level ( P < .001), incidence of subluxation ( P = .003) or positive apprehension ( P = .002), and revision surgery for recurrent instability ( P = .027). Conclusion: Outcomes after the congruent arc modification proved at least equivalent to the traditional Latarjet procedure in terms of recurrent instability and return to sport, although early and late complications were equivalent. The congruent arc procedure may be an acceptable alternative to traditional Latarjet for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss; however, long-term outcomes of this procedure are needed.

scholarly journals A Multicenter Retrospective Study With a Minimum 5-Year Follow-up Comparing Arthroscopic Bankart Repair and the Latarjet Procedure

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712094136
Author(s):  
Eran Maman ◽  
Oleg Dolkart ◽  
Rafael Krespi ◽  
Assaf Kadar ◽  
Gabriel Mozes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽  
Functional Scores

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the Latarjet procedure are surgical techniques commonly used to treat anterior shoulder instability. There is no consensus among shoulder surgeons regarding the indications for choosing one over the other. Purpose: To compare the results of the Latarjet procedure with those of ABR for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data on all patients who were treated surgically for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected at 4 medical centers. The minimum follow-up was 5 years. Data were retrieved from medical charts, and patients were interviewed to assess their level of satisfaction (range, 0-100), functional outcomes (using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score; the Subjective Shoulder Value; and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score), and quality of life (using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]). Information on return to sports activities and postoperative level of activity compared with that of the preinjury state, complications, reoperations, and recurrent instability were recorded and evaluated. Results: A total of 242 patients were included. The Latarjet procedure was performed in 27 shoulders, and ABR was performed in 215 shoulders. Patients in the ABR group had significantly higher rates of redislocation (18.5%; P = .05) and subluxation (21.4%; P = .43) but a lower rate of self-reported apprehension (43.0%; P = .05) compared with patients in the Latarjet group (3.7%, 14.8%, and 63.0%, respectively). There were 5 patients in the ABR group who underwent reoperation with the Latarjet procedure because of recurrent instability. The functional scores in the Latarjet group were better than those in the ABR group. The SF-12 physical score was significantly better in the Latarjet group than in the ABR group (98.1 vs 93.9, respectively; P = .01). Patient satisfaction and subjective scores were similar in both groups. Conclusion: These results support recently published data on the Latarjet procedure that showed its superiority over ABR in midterm stability (dislocations or subluxations). The contribution of self-reported apprehension to the broad definition of stability is not clear, and apprehension rates were not correlated with satisfaction scores or the recurrence of dislocation or subluxation.

Open Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1248-1253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eoghan T. Hurley ◽  
Daren Lim Fat ◽  
Shane K. Farrington ◽  
Hannan Mullett
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Procedure ◽  
Arthroscopic Latarjet ◽  
Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure

Background: Anterior shoulder instability with significant glenoid bone loss is a challenging condition. The open Latarjet procedure is the established standard treatment method in this setting, but there is an increasing use of the arthroscopic technique. Purpose: To systematically review the current evidence in the literature to ascertain if the open or arthroscopic Latarjet procedure resulted in improved patient outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Cohort studies comparing the open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for anterior shoulder instability were included. Clinical outcomes were compared, with all statistical analysis performed using Review Manager (version 5.3). A P value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Six clinical trials with 896 patients were included. The open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures resulted in a similar number of total recurrent instability (2.0% vs 2.4%; P = .75), revision procedures (2.4% vs 5.4%; P = .06), and total complications (13.8% vs 11.9%; P = .50), but the open procedure had a lower rate of persistent apprehension (10.2% vs 35.7%; P < .05). In addition, after the learning curve, the operative time was similar between the 2 procedures. Conclusion: Both the open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures result in significant improvements in patient function and outcome scores, with low rates of recurrent instability and similar complication rates. While technically challenging, the arthroscopic procedure has been shown to be a safe and viable alternative. However, there is a significant learning curve associated with the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure. The significant learning curve associated with this procedure suggests the arthroscopic procedure may be advisable to perform only in high-volume centers with experienced arthroscopists.

scholarly journals Outcomes of the Latarjet procedure with minimum 5- and 10-year follow-up: A systematic review

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 315-329
Author(s):  
Ron Gilat ◽  
Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne ◽  
Eric D Haunschild ◽  
Derrick M Knapik ◽  
Kevin C Parvaresh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sport ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Follow Up Studies ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Background The purpose of this study was to evaluate mid- and long-term outcomes following the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability. Methods PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane libraries were systematically searched, in line with PRISMA guidelines, for studies reporting on outcomes following the Latarjet procedure with minimum five-year follow-up. Outcomes of studies with follow-up between 5 and 10 years were compared to those with minimum follow-up of 10 years. Results Fifteen studies reporting on 1052 Latarjet procedures were included. Recurrent instability occurred in 127 patients, with an overall random summary estimates in studies with a minimum five-year follow-up of 0–18% (I2 = 90%) compared to 5–26% (I2 = 59%) for studies with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Overall rates for return to sports, non-instability related complications, and progression of arthritis estimated at 65–100% (I2 = 87%), 0–20% (I2 = 85%), and 8–42% (I2 = 89%) for the minimum five-year follow-up studies and 62–93% (I2 = 86%), 0–9% (I2 = 28%), and 9–71% (I2 = 91%) for the minimum 10-year follow-up studies, respectively. All studies reported good-to-excellent mean PRO scores at final follow-up. Conclusions The Latarjet is a safe and effective procedure for patients with shoulder instability. The majority of patients return to sport, though at long-term follow-up, a trend towards an increased incidence of recurrent instability is appreciated, while a significant number may demonstrate arthritis progression.

Repair Versus Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of 3275 Shoulders

2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652096208
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. Imam ◽  
Mohamed S.A. Shehata ◽  
Alexander Martin ◽  
Hamdy Attia ◽  
Muhammad Sinokrot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Lower Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Risk Of Recurrence ◽  
Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

Background: Little consensus is available regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, treatment selection has been based on training and tradition rather than the available evidence. Purpose: This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes between arthroscopic Bankart procedure and the Latarjet procedure in the treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with emphasis on follow-up time. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Ovid, and Web of Science up to January 2018 and included studies that compared arthroscopic Bankart versus Latarjet for treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Continuous data, such as operative time and patient-reported outcomes, were pooled as mean differences (MDs), whereas dichotomous data, such as recurrence, revision, redislocation, arthropathy, infection, and hematoma, were pooled as risk ratios (RRs), with 95% CIs. Results: Pooling data from 7 cohort studies (3275 patients) showed that arthroscopic Bankart was associated with a higher risk of redislocation (RR, 2.74; 95% CI, 1.48-5.06; P = .03), a higher risk of recurrence (RR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.91-4.30; P < .0001), and a lower risk of infection (RR, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.43; P = .0002) compared with Latarjet, while the effect size did not favor arthroscopic Bankart or Latarjet in terms of Rowe score (MD, 0.22; 95% CI, –5.64 to 6.08; P = .94), revision (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.08-1.39; P = .13), and hematoma (RR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.03-1.19; P = .07). The effect estimate showed a pronounced advantage for Latarjet from 6 to 10 years postoperatively in terms of recurrence and redislocation (RR, 3.00; 95% CI, 1.98-4.56 and RR, 2.85; 95% CI, 1.51-5.38, respectively). Conclusion: Our results showed that Latarjet had less risk of recurrence and redislocation with longer follow-up time. Both procedures were comparable in terms of Rowe score, the need for revision, and postoperative hematoma formation, whereas Bankart repair was associated with a lower risk of infection.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Shoulder Stabilization in Females With Glenoid Bone Loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596712110075
Author(s):  
Rachel M. Frank ◽  
Hytham S. Salem ◽  
Catherine Richardson ◽  
Michael O’Brien ◽  
Jon M. Newgren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Simple Shoulder Test ◽  
Female Patients

Background: Nearly all studies describing shoulder stabilization focus on male patients. Little is known regarding the clinical outcomes of female patients undergoing shoulder stabilization, and even less is understood about females with glenoid bone loss. Purpose: To assess the clinical outcomes of female patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability treated with the Latarjet procedure. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All cases of female patients who had recurrent anterior shoulder instability with ≥15% anterior glenoid bone loss and underwent the Latarjet procedure were analyzed. Patients were evaluated after a minimum 2-year postoperative period with scores of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons form, Simple Shoulder Test, and pain visual analog scale. Results: Of the 22 patients who met our criteria, 5 (22.7%) were lost to follow-up, leaving 17 (77.2%) available for follow-up with a mean ± SD age of 31.7 ± 12.9 years. Among these patients, 16 (94.1%) underwent 1.6 ± 0.73 ipsilateral shoulder operations (range, 1-3) before undergoing the Latarjet procedure. Preoperative indications for surgery included recurrent instability with bone loss in all cases. After a mean follow-up of 40.2 ± 22.9 months, patients experienced significant score improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons form, Simple Shoulder Test, and pain visual analog scale ( P < .05 for all). There were 2 reoperations (11.8%). There were no cases of neurovascular injuries or other complications. Conclusion: Female patients with recurrent shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss can be successfully treated with the Latarjet procedure, with outcomes similar to those of male patients in the previously published literature. This information can be used to counsel female patients with recurrent instability with significant anterior glenoid bone loss.

scholarly journals Failed Latarjet procedure: a systematic review of surgery revision options

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matteo Buda ◽  
Riccardo D’Ambrosi ◽  
Enrico Bellato ◽  
Davide Blonna ◽  
Alessandro Cappellari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Case Series ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Radiographic Outcomes

Abstract Background Revision surgery after the Latarjet procedure is a rare and challenging surgical problem, and various bony or capsular procedures have been proposed. This systematic review examines clinical and radiographic outcomes of different procedures for treating persistent pain or recurrent instability after a Latarjet procedure. Methods A systematic review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, Google Scholar and Ovid databases with the combined keywords “failed”, “failure”, “revision”, “Latarjet”, “shoulder stabilization” and “shoulder instability” to identify articles published in English that deal with failed Latarjet procedures. Results A total of 11 studies (five retrospective and six case series investigations), all published between 2008 and 2020, fulfilled our inclusion criteria. For the study, 253 patients (254 shoulders, 79.8% male) with a mean age of 29.6 years (range: 16–54 years) were reviewed at an average follow-up of 51.5 months (range: 24–208 months). Conclusions Eden–Hybinette and arthroscopic capsuloplasty are the most popular and safe procedures to treat recurrent instability after a failed Latarjet procedure, and yield reasonable clinical outcomes. A bone graft procedure and capsuloplasty were proposed but there was no clear consensus on their efficacy and indication. Level of evidence Level IV Trial registration PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020185090—www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/

scholarly journals Outcomes of arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction for anterior instability with greater than 20% glenoid bone defects: are Latarjet procedures absolutely indicated for these patients?

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sae Hoon Kim ◽  
Whanik Jung ◽  
Sung-Min Rhee ◽  
Ji Un Kim ◽  
Joo Han Oh
Keyword(s):  
Bone Defect ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Defects ◽  
Defect Size ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Return To Sports ◽  
Anterior Instability ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Capsulolabral Reconstruction

Background: Recent studies have reported high rates of recurrence of shoulder instability in patients with glenoid bone defects greater than 20% after capsulolabral reconstruction. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the failure rate of arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction for the treatment of anterior instability in the presence of glenoid bone deficits >20%. Methods: Retrospective analyses were conducted among cases with anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone defects of >20% that were treated by arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction with a minimum 2-year follow-up (30 cases). We included the following variables: age, bone defect size, instability severity index score (ISIS), on-/off-track assessment, incidence recurrent instability, and return to sports. Results: The mean glenoid bone defect size was 25.8% ± 4.2% (range, 20.4%–37.2%), and 18 cases (60%) had defects of >25%. Bony Bankart lesions were identified in 11 cases (36.7%). Eleven cases (36.7%) had ISIS scores >6 points and 21 cases (70%) had off-track lesions. No cases of recurrent instability were identified over a mean follow-up of 39.9 months (range, 24–86 months), but a sense of subluxation was reported by three patients. Return to sports at the preinjury level was possible in 24 cases (80%), and the average satisfaction rating was 92%. Conclusions: Arthroscopic soft tissue reconstruction was successful for treating anterior shoulder instability among patients with glenoid bone defects >20%, even enabling return to sports. Future studies should focus on determining the range of bone defect sizes that can be successfully managed by soft tissue repair.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document