scholarly journals Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction: Analysis of the Learning Curve

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 232596711880790 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iustin Moga ◽  
George Konstantinidis ◽  
Catherine Coady ◽  
Swagata Ghosh ◽  
Ivan Ho-Bun Wong

Background: Anatomic glenoid reconstruction involves the use of distal tibial allograft for bony augmentation of the glenoid surface. An all-arthroscopic approach was recently described to avoid damage to the subscapularis tendon and preserve the capsule and labrum. Purpose: To explore and compare change in surgical time between 2 proposed methods used for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability—arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction (AAGR) and arthroscopic Latarjet (AL)—over successive procedures. We also compared graft positioning on the anterior glenoid surface between the 2 methods. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: This was a single-surgeon retrospective review of 54 cases of surgically treated recurrent anterior shoulder instability: 27 had AAGR with distal tibial allograft, while the other 27 had AL. AAGR with the distal tibial allograft was the primary choice for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability; however, AL was performed when tibial allograft was not available from the bone bank. Thus, there was an overlapping period for those 2 procedures. Procedure start and end times were recorded, and duration was calculated. Postoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography scans were reviewed, and graft position was judged to be in the lower third (desired position), middle third, or upper third of the anterior glenoid surface. To assess learning, these data were organized in chronological order of surgery, and each surgical cohort was divided into 3 chronological clusters of 9 patients each. Learning was assessed through change in operative time over successive clusters, change in variability of operative time among clusters, and change in graft positioning among clusters. Statistical analysis comprised a 2-tailed independent-sample t test and the Levene test for equality of variance. Results: Our study found that AAGR was significantly faster to perform than AL in the early ( P = .001), middle ( P = .001), and late ( P = .05) clusters of each cohort. Duration of surgery did not significantly improve across clusters within each cohort ( P = .15-.79). There were no significant changes in the variability of surgical time in the AAGR group ( P = .09) or the AL group ( P = .13). Desired positioning of the bone graft on the anterior glenoid surface (lower third) was identified more commonly in the AAGR cohort. Conclusion: AAGR is faster to learn and perform than AL for the treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with significant glenoid bone loss. The current study found higher rates of desired graft positioning for AAGR clusters.

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 232596711881398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica L. Hughes ◽  
Tracey Bastrom ◽  
Andrew T. Pennock ◽  
Eric W. Edmonds

Background: Recurrent shoulder dislocation after surgical intervention in adolescents with anterior instability is now understood to occur with a relatively high frequency. The remplissage procedure is successfully used in the adult population to mitigate the ability of a Hill-Sachs lesion to engage the anterior glenoid and can be used during an arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. Purpose: To compare the clinical outcomes in adolescent patients who underwent a Bankart repair with or without remplissage for treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability and associated Hill-Sachs defects. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on adolescents who underwent a remplissage procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability from 2009 to 2017 at a single institution. Controls were identified in a cohort of patients who underwent a Bankart repair only and were matched based on age, sex, and size of Hill-Sachs lesion. All patients were then contacted to determine instability recurrence as well as to complete the shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) and the Pediatric Adolescent Shoulder Score (PASS) outcome surveys. Results: Twenty-one adolescents underwent a remplissage procedure, and 20 matched controls underwent only a Bankart procedure. A significantly higher rate of recurrence was noted in the Bankart-only patients (8/17) compared with remplissage patients (2/15) ( P = .04). No statistical difference was found in patient-reported outcome scores between treatment groups or in range of motion measurements ( P > .05). In a subset of patients in the remplissage group with pre- and postoperative surveys available, mean ± SD scores for PASS (77 ± 11) and QuickDASH (19 ± 12) improved when compared with preoperative scores (PASS, 54 ± 16; QuickDASH, 35 ± 28), but only the PASS score was statistically improved (PASS, P = .003; QuickDASH, P = .23). Conclusion: The addition of the remplissage procedure to a Bankart repair is a reasonable surgical option to treat a Hill-Sachs deformity in adolescents with anterior shoulder instability. The success of this additional procedure may be due to filling the Hill-Sachs defect, or perhaps it augments stability through a mechanism of posterior capsulorrhaphy. Either way, this young athletic population appears to have a lower rate of recurrence and improved patient-reported outcomes with a remplissage procedure to address the Hill-Sachs deformity.


2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 232596711667626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel J. Gottschalk ◽  
Aaron J. Bois ◽  
Marcus A. Shelby ◽  
Anthony Miniaci ◽  
Morgan H. Jones

Background: There is a strong correlation between glenoid defect size and recurrent anterior shoulder instability. A better understanding of glenoid defects could lead to improved treatments and outcomes. Purpose: To (1) determine the rate of reporting numeric measurements for glenoid defect size, (2) determine the consistency of glenoid defect size and location reported within the literature, (3) define the typical size and location of glenoid defects, and (4) determine whether a correlation exists between defect size and treatment outcome. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane databases were searched for clinical studies measuring glenoid defect size or location. We excluded studies with defect size requirements or pathology other than anterior instability and studies that included patients with known prior surgery. Our search produced 83 studies; 38 studies provided numeric measurements for glenoid defect size and 2 for defect location. Results: From 1981 to 2000, a total of 5.6% (1 of 18) of the studies reported numeric measurements for glenoid defect size; from 2001 to 2014, the rate of reporting glenoid defects increased to 58.7% (37 of 63). Fourteen studies (n = 1363 shoulders) reported defect size ranges for percentage loss of glenoid width, and 9 studies (n = 570 shoulders) reported defect size ranges for percentage loss of glenoid surface area. According to 2 studies, the mean glenoid defect orientation was pointing toward the 3:01 and 3:20 positions on the glenoid clock face. Conclusion: Since 2001, the rate of reporting numeric measurements for glenoid defect size was only 58.7%. Among studies reporting the percentage loss of glenoid width, 23.6% of shoulders had a defect between 10% and 25%, and among studies reporting the percentage loss of glenoid surface area, 44.7% of shoulders had a defect between 5% and 20%. There is significant variability in the way glenoid bone loss is measured, calculated, and reported.


2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110182
Author(s):  
Craig R. Bottoni ◽  
John D. Johnson ◽  
Liang Zhou ◽  
Sarah G. Raybin ◽  
James S. Shaha ◽  
...  

Background: Recent studies have demonstrated equivalent short-term results when comparing arthroscopic versus open anterior shoulder stabilization. However, none have evaluated the long-term clinical outcomes of patients after arthroscopic or open anterior shoulder stabilization, with inclusion of an assessment of preoperative glenoid tracking. Purpose: To compare long-term clinical outcomes of patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability randomized to open and arthroscopic stabilization groups. Additionally, preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were used to assess whether the shoulders were “on-track” or “off-track” to ascertain a prediction of increased failure risk. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: A consecutive series of 64 patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability were randomized to receive either arthroscopic or open stabilization by a single surgeon. Follow-up assessments were performed at minimum 15-year follow-up using established postoperative evaluations. Clinical failure was defined as any recurrent dislocation postoperatively or subjective instability. Preoperative MRI scans were obtained to calculate the glenoid track and designate shoulders as on-track or off-track. These results were then correlated with the patients’ clinical results at their latest follow-up. Results: Of 64 patients, 60 (28 arthroscopic and 32 open) were contacted or examined for follow-up (range, 15-17 years). The mean age at the time of surgery was 25 years (range, 19-42 years), while the mean age at the time of this assessment was 40 years (range, 34-57 years). The rates of arthroscopic and open long-term failure were 14.3% (4/28) and 12.5% (4/32), respectively. There were no differences in subjective shoulder outcome scores between the treatment groups. Of the 56 shoulders, with available MRI studies, 8 (14.3%) were determined to be off-track. Of these 8 shoulders, there were 2 surgical failures (25.0%; 1 treated arthroscopically, 1 treated open). In the on-track group, 6 of 48 had failed surgery (12.5%; 3 open, 3 arthroscopic [ P = .280]). Conclusion: Long-term clinical outcomes were comparable at 15 years postoperatively between the arthroscopic and open stabilization groups. The presence of an off-track lesion may be associated with a higher rate of recurrent instability in both cohorts at long-term follow-up; however, this study was underpowered to verify this situation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document