Fatigue Acetabular Fracture after Lumbopelvic Instrumented Fusion in Elderly

Purpose. Only several cases of acetabular “fatigue”/insufficiency fractures have been reported in elderly patients with osteoporosis. However, fatigue acetabular fracture below lumbopelvic fixation has not been published. This review reports on the frequency and mechanisms of acetabular fatigue fractures in elderly individuals, including postmenopausal osteoporosis, and presents a case of an acetabular “fatigue” fracture in association with lumbopelvic fusion. Methods. We report on a 71-year-old postmenopausal woman who underwent in our department a L2-pelvis instrumented fusion for failed lumbar decompression and interbody fusion performed in another institution. For at least one year, the patient was receiving antiosteoporotic treatment (Alendronate plus Calcium and Vitamin D) and was fully ambulatory without limping. Eighteen months following our surgery, the patient sought again our department because of increasing pain in her right hip and limping without trauma. Results. The physical examination disclosed painful passive motion in her right hip. The roentgenograms and CT-scans disclosed a transverse acetabular fracture with radiolucencies around both iliac screw tips, particularly the right. Additionally, a severe compression fracture of the 12th thoracic vertebral body and upper endplate of the L2 vertebra was disclosed. We recommended open stabilization of the acetabulum and T12 and L2 vertebrae. Immediately before the planned surgeries, the patient had a serious heart infarct, and thus, surgeries were canceled by the patient’s cardiologist because of the high perioperative risk. The patient and relatives denied further surgeries because of the heart disease. In the final telephone call and CT and roentgenographic evaluation that went to us after request, there was an acetabular pseudarthrosis in the right hip without however associated complaints. Since surgery was not accepted, the patient was prescribed Denosumab injection therapy plus Vitamin and Calcium supplement. Conclusion. This case report emphasizes the significance of follow-up observation of elderly patients with postmenopausal osteoporosis following lumbopelvic fusions, for possible fatigue acetabular and vertebral fractures. The authors speculate that this extremely rare acetabular “fatigue”/insufficiency fracture should be the result of increased repetitive mechanical forces acting around the acetabulum in association with osteoporosis.

Arthroscopic Versus Open Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial With 15-Year Follow-up With an Assessment of the Glenoid Being “On-Track” and “Off-Track” as a Predictor of Failure

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.

Return to Play After Revision Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Systematic Review

Background: Revision shoulder stabilizations are becoming increasingly common. Returning to play after revision shoulder stabilizations is important to patients. Purpose: To evaluate the return-to-play rate after revision anterior shoulder stabilization using arthroscopic, open, coracoid transfer, or free bone block procedures. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All English-language studies published between 2000 and 2020 that reported on return to play after revision anterior shoulder stabilization were reviewed. Clinical outcomes that were evaluated included rate of overall return to play, level of return to play, and time to return to play. Study quality was evaluated using the Downs and Black quality assessment score. Results: Eighteen studies (1 level 2; 17 level 4; mean Downs and Black score, 10.1/31) on revision anterior shoulder stabilization reported on return to play and met inclusion criteria (7 arthroscopic, 5 open, 3 Latarjet, and 3 bony augmentation), with a total of 564 revision cases (mean age, 27.9 years; 84.1% male). The weighted mean length of follow-up was 52.5 months. The overall weighted rate of return to play was 80.1%. The weighted mean rate of return to play was 84.0% (n = 153) after arthroscopic revision, 91.5% (n = 153) after open revision, 88.1% (n = 149) after Latarjet, and 73.8% (n = 65) after bone augmentation. The weighted mean rate of return to same level of play was 69.7% for arthroscopic revision, 70.0% for open revision, 67.1% for Latarjet revision, and 61.8% after bone block revision. There were 5 studies that reported on time to return to play, with a weighted mean of 7.75 months (4 arthroscopic) and 5.2 months (1 Latarjet). The weighted mean rates of complication (for studies that provided it) were 3.3% after arthroscopic revision (n = 174), 3.5% after open revision (n = 110), 9.3% after Latarjet revision (n = 108), and 45.8% after bone block revision (n = 72). Conclusion: Revision using open stabilization demonstrated the highest return-to-play rate. Revision using Latarjet had the quickest time to return to play but had higher complication rates. When evaluated for return to same level of play, arthroscopic, open, and Latarjet had similar rates, and bone block had lower rates. The choice of an optimal revision shoulder stabilization technique, however, depends on patient goals. Higher-quality studies are needed to compare treatments regarding return to play after revision shoulder stabilization.

Instrumentation Removal following Minimally Invasive Posterior Percutaneous Pedicle Screw-Rod Stabilization (PercStab) of Thoracolumbar Fractures Is Not Always Required

Study Design. Clinical case series. Background. Percutaneous stabilization for spinal trauma confers less blood loss, reduces postoperative pain, and is less invasive than open stabilization and fusion. The current standard of care includes instrumentation removal. Objective. 1. Reporting patient outcomes following minimally invasive posterior percutaneous pedicle screw-rod stabilization (PercStab). 2. Evaluating the results of instrumentation retention. Methods. A prospective observational study of 32 consecutive patients receiving PercStab without direct decompression or fusion. Baseline data demographics were collected. Operative outcomes of interest were operative room (OR) time, blood loss, and length of hospital stay. Follow-up variables of interest included patient satisfaction, Numeric Rating Scales for Back and Leg (NRS-B/L) pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and return to work. Clinical outcome data (ODI and NRS-B/L) were collected at 3, 12, 24 months and continued at a 24-month interval up to a maximum of 8 years postoperatively. Results. 81.25% of patients (n = 26) retained their instrumentation and reported minimal disability, mild pain, and satisfaction with their surgery and returned to work (mean = 6 months). Six patients required instrumentation removal due to prominence of the instrumentation or screw loosening, causing discomfort/pain. Instrumentation removal patients reported moderate back and leg pain until removal occurred; after removal, they reported minimal disability and mild pain. Neither instrumentation removal nor retention resulted in complications or further surgical intervention. Conclusions. PercStab without instrumentation removal provided high patient satisfaction, mild pain, and minimal disability and relieved the patient from the burden of finances and resources allocation of a second surgery.

Epidemiology of Paediatric Shoulder Dislocation: A Nationwide Study in Italy from 2001 to 2014

Limited knowledge is accessible concerning the tendencies of hospitalization for skeletally immature patients with episodes of shoulder dislocation. Our research aim was to evaluate annual hospitalizations for shoulder dislocation in paediatric patients in Italy from 2001 to 2014, on the basis of the official data source as hospitalization reports. The second purpose was to investigate geographical diversification in hospitalization for shoulder dislocation in regions of Italy. The last aim was to make statistical predictions of the number of shoulder dislocation hospitalization volumes and rates in skeletally immature patients based on data from 2001 to 2014. An examination of the National Hospital Discharge records (SDO) kept at the Italian Ministry of Health regarding the 14 years of our study (2001 through 2014) was conducted. These data are anonymous and include patient’s age, gender, domicile, region and time of hospitalization, and the kind of reimbursement (public or private). In the 14-year study time, 344 hospitalizations for shoulder dislocation of patients aged 0–14 years took place in Italy. The male/female hospitalization ratio varied from a maximum of 3.0 (2001) to a minimum of 1.1 (2013), with a mean average ratio in the 2001–2014 timespan of 2.0. Almost half of the hospitalizations (49.1%) were performed in the South. The mean incidence of hospitalizations in Italy for shoulder dislocation in patients with less than 14 years was 0.3 for every 100,000 inhabitants in the same class of age. The most common treatment was a closed reduction (60.8%), followed by open stabilization (16.6%) and arthroscopic procedures (13.7%). The present registry study shows a low incidence of hospitalization for shoulder dislocation in young patients. The most common treatment for a shoulder dislocation in paediatric patients is a closed shoulder reduction. Regions from the south and the centre of Italy are marked by an inferior number of operations and a higher number of hospitalization for closed shoulder reduction.

Recurrent Shoulder Instability: Do Morbidity and Treatment Differ Based on Insurance?

Background: Patients with public insurance often face barriers to obtaining prompt orthopaedic care. For patients with recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability, delayed care may be associated with increasing bone loss and subsequently more extensive surgical procedures. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether differences exist in patients undergoing treatment for shoulder instability between those with Medicaid versus non-Medicaid insurance. We hypothesized that at the time of surgery, Medicaid patients would have experienced greater delays in care, would have a more extensive history of instability, would have more bone loss, and would require more extensive surgical procedures than other patients. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Patients were identified who underwent surgical stabilization for traumatic anterior shoulder instability between January 1, 2011, and December 1, 2015, at a single sports medicine practice. Clinic, billing, and operative records were reviewed for each patient to determine age, sex, insurance type, total number of instability episodes, time from first instability episode to surgery, intraoperative findings, and procedure performed. Glenoid bone loss was quantified by use of preoperative imaging studies. Results: During this time period, 206 patients (55 Medicaid, 131 private insurance, 11 Tricare, 9 workers’ compensation) underwent surgical stabilization for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Average wait time from initial injury to surgery was 1640 days (95% CI, 1155-2125 days) for Medicaid patients compared with 1237 days (95% CI, 834-1639 days) for others ( P = .005). Medicaid patients were more likely to have sustained 5 or more instability events at the time of surgery (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.64-6.69; P = .001), had a higher risk of having 15% or more glenoid bone loss on preoperative imaging (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.3-10.0; P = .01), and had a higher risk of requiring Latarjet or other open stabilization procedures as opposed to an arthroscopic repair (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-6.2; P = .002) when compared with other patients. Conclusion: Among patients undergoing surgery for traumatic anterior shoulder instability, patients with Medicaid had significantly more delayed care. Correspondingly, they reported a more extensive history of instability, were more likely to have severe bone loss, and required more invasive stabilization procedures.

Glenoid osteotomy for atraumatic posteroinferior shoulder instability associated with glenoid dysplasia

Aims We report the clinical results of glenoid osteotomy in patients with atraumatic posteroinferior instability associated with glenoid dysplasia. Patients and Methods The study reports results in 211 patients (249 shoulders) with atraumatic posteroinferior instability. The patients comprised 63 men and 148 women with a mean age of 20 years. The posteroinferior glenoid surface was elevated by osteotomy at the scapular neck. A body spica was applied to maintain the arm perpendicular to the glenoid for two weeks postoperatively. Clinical results were evaluated using the Rowe score and Japan Shoulder Society Shoulder Instability Score (JSS-SIS); bone union, osteoarthrosis, and articular congruity were examined on plain radiographs. Results The Rowe score improved from 36 to 88 points, and the JSS-SIS improved from 47 to 81 points. All shoulders exhibited union without progression of osteoarthritis except one shoulder, which showed osteoarthritic change due to a previous surgery before the glenoid osteotomy. All but three shoulders showed improvement in joint congruency. Eight patients developed disordered scapulohumeral rhythm during arm elevation, and 12 patients required additional open stabilization for anterior instability. Conclusion Good results can be expected from glenoid osteotomy in patients with atraumatic posteroinferior instability associated with glenoid dysplasia. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:331–7.

Trends in Shoulder Stabilization Techniques Used in the United States Based on a Large Private-Payer Database

Background: Arthroscopic stabilization is the most broadly used surgical procedure in the United States for management of recurrent shoulder instability. Latarjet coracoid transfer has been considered a salvage surgical procedure for failed arthroscopic repairs or cases of significant glenoid bone loss; however, with recent literature suggesting reduced risk of recurrent instability with Latarjet, several surgeons have advocated its broader utilization as a primary operation for treatment of shoulder instability. Purpose: To determine trends in shoulder stabilization techniques used in the United States. Study Design: Cross-sectional study. Methods: A retrospective analysis of a publicly available national insurance database was performed to identify shoulder stabilization procedures performed over 9 years (2007-2015). The following Current Procedural Terminology codes were searched: 29806 (arthroscopic stabilization), 23455 (open capsulolabral repair), 23466 (open capsular shift), 23462 (Latarjet coracoid transfer), and 23460 (open anterior capsulorrhaphy with other bone block augmentation). Outcomes of interest included (1) trends in the use of each technique throughout the study interval, (2) age and sex distributions of patients undergoing each technique, and (3) regional predilections for the use of each technique. Results: Arthroscopic stabilization was the most broadly used shoulder stabilization procedure in the database (87%), followed by open Bankart (7%), Latarjet (3.2%), open capsular shift (2.6%), and alternative bone block procedure (0.8%). Throughout the study period, the incidence of arthroscopic stabilization and Latarjet increased (8% and 15% per year, respectively); the incidence of open capsular shift remained relatively constant; and the incidence of open Bankart decreased (9% per year). Arthroscopic stabilization, open Bankart, and Latarjet each had similar sex-based distributions (roughly 70% male), while open capsular shift and alternative bone block were relatively more common in females (54% and 50% male, respectively). The incidence of arthroscopic stabilization and Latarjet were greatest in the South and lowest in the Northeast. Conclusion: Arthroscopic stabilization remains the most commonly utilized stabilization technique in the United States. The use of the Latarjet procedure is steadily increasing and now rivals open Bankart stabilization among the most commonly used open stabilization techniques.