Assessment of new method of posterior spinal fusion in the treatment of patients with posttraumatic kyphotic deformity of the thoracic and lumbar spine

Objective. To carry out a comparative analysis of two methods of the posterior bone block formation (with autograft bone chips or with a whole vertebral arch) and to assess the rate of bone block formation, the degree of surgery invasiveness and the patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction with the results.Material and Methods. The study involved 31 patients with kyphotic deformity of the thoracic spine, of which 15 patients underwent spinal fusion using autograft bone chips (control group), and 16 were operated on using a new technique with a whole vertebral arch. The results of treatment were assessed using a modified MacNab scale. During the follow-up period from 1.5 to 2 years, pain syndrome was assessed according to VAS, quality of life according the Oswestry Disability Index, and cosmetic satisfaction was assessed using the SRS-22 scale.Results. In the course of the work, it was revealed that in patients who were operated on using new method, the time of bone block formation according to CT data was shorter, the overall satisfaction with surgery result was higher (mainly due to the absence of a cosmetic defect), and the indicators of the operation duration and blood loss did not differ compared to those in the control group.Conclusion. Based on the results obtained, spinal fusion using a whole vertebral arch can be recommended in clinical practice for surgical interventions in patients with kyphotic deformities of the spine.

Anterior and posterior glenoid bone augmentation options for shoulder instability: state of the art

Bony lesions are highly prevalent in anterior shoulder instability and can be a significant cause of failure of stabilisation procedures if they are not adequately addressed. The glenoid track concept describes the dynamic interaction between the humeral head and glenoid defects in anterior shoulder instability. It has been beneficial for understanding the role played by bone defects in this entity. As a consequence, the popularity of glenoid augmentation procedures aimed to treat anterior glenoid bone defects; reconstructing the anatomy of the glenohumeral joint has risen sharply in the last decade. Although bone defects are less common in posterior instability, posterior bone block procedures can be indicated to treat not only posterior bony lesions, attritional posterior glenoid erosion or dysplasia but also normal or retroverted glenoids to provide an extended glenoid surface to increase the glenohumeral stability. The purpose of this review was to analyse the rationale, current indications and results of surgical techniques aimed to augment the glenoid surface in patients diagnosed of either anterior or posterior instability by assessing a thorough review of modern literature. Classical techniques such as Latarjet or free bone block procedures have proven to be effective in augmenting the glenoid surface and consequently achieving adequate shoulder stability with good clinical outcomes and early return to athletic activity. Innovations in surgical techniques have permitted to perform these procedures arthroscopically. Arthroscopy provides the theoretical advantages of lower morbidity and faster recovery, as well as the identification and treatment of concomitant pathologies.

Recurrent posterior shoulder instability starting in childhood and adolescence

Aims We aimed to address the question on whether there is a place for shoulder stabilization surgery in patients who had voluntary posterior instability starting in childhood and adolescence, and later becoming involuntary and uncontrollable. Methods Consecutive patients who had an operation for recurrent posterior instability before the age of 18 years were studied retrospectively. All patients had failed conservative treatment for at least six months prior to surgery; and no patients had psychiatric disorders. Two groups were identified and compared: voluntary posterior instability starting in childhood which became uncontrollable and involuntary (group VBI); and involuntary posterior instability (group I). Patients were reviewed and assessed at least two years after surgery by two examiners. Results In all 38 patients (40 shoulders) were included: group I (20 shoulders), with involuntary posterior instability (onset at 14 years of age (SD 2.3), and group VBI (20 shoulders), with initially voluntary posterior instability (onset at 9 years of age (SD 2.6) later becoming involuntary (16 years of age (SD 3.5). Mean age at surgery was 20 years (SD 4.6 years; 12 to 35). A posterior bone block was performed in 18 patients and a posterior capsular shift in 22. The mean follow-up was 7.7 years (2 to 18). Recurrence of posterior instability was seen in nine patients, 30% in group VBI (6/20 shoulders) and 15% in group I (3/20 shoulders) (p > 0.050). At final follow-up, the shoulder's of two patients in each group had been revised. No differences between either group were found for functional outcomes, return to sport, subjective, and radiological results. Conclusion Although achieving stability in patients with so-called voluntary instability, which evolves into an involuntary condition, is difficult, shoulder stabilization may be undertaken with similar outcomes to those patients treated surgically for involuntary instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1760–1766.

Treatment of The Posterior Unstable Shoulder

Background:It is estimated that approximately 5% of glenohumeral instabilities are posterior. There are a number of controversies regarding therapeutic approaches for these patients.Methods:We analyse the main surgery alternatives for the treatment of the posterior shoulder instability. We did a research of the publications related with posterior glenohumeral instability.Results:There are conservative and surgical treatment options. Conservative treatment has positive results in most patients, with around 65 to 80% of cases showing recurrent posterior dislocation.There are multiple surgical techniques, both open and arthroscopic, for the treatment of posterior glenohumeral instability. There are procedures that aim to repair bone defects and others that aim to repair soft tissues and capsulolabral injuries. The treatment should be planned according to each case on an individual basis according to the patient characteristics and the injury type.Surgical treatment is indicated in patients with functional limitations arising from instability and/or pain that have not improved with rehabilitation treatment.The indications for arthroscopic treatment are recurrent posterior subluxation caused by injury of the labrum or the capsulolabral complex; recurrent posterior subluxation caused by capsuloligamentous laxity or capsular redundancy; and multidirectional instability with posterior instability as a primary component. Arthroscopic assessment will help identify potential injuries associated with posterior instability such as bone lesions or defects and lesions or defects of soft tissues.The main indications for open surgery would be in cases of Hill Sachs lesions or broad reverse Bankart lesions not accessible by arthroscopy.We indicated non-anatomical techniques (McLaughlin or its modifications) for reverse Hill-Sachs lesions with impairment of the articular surface between 20% and 50%. Disimpaction of the fracture and placement of bone graft (allograft or autograft) is a suitable treatment for acute lesions that do not exceed 50% of the articular surface and with articular cartilage in good condition. Reconstruction with allograft may be useful in lesions affecting up to 50% of the humeral surface and should be considered when there is a situation of non-viable cartilage at the fracture site. For defects greater than 50% of the articular surface or in the case of dislocations over 6 months in duration where there is poor bone quality, some authors advocate substitution techniques as a treatment of choice. The main techniques for treating glenoid bone defects are posterior bone block and posterior opening osteotomy of the glenoid.Conclusions:The treatment of the posterior glenohumeral instability has to be individualized based on the patient´s injuries, medical history, clinical exam and goals. The most important complications in the treatment of posterior glenohumeral instability are recurrent instability, avascular necrosis and osteoarthritis.